Feasibility Report for PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, to (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

TABLE OF CONTENTS

KEY PLAN OF H-II SOJAT - PINDWARA PROJECT ROAD ON GT SHEET. .... 7

CHAPTER – 1 ...... 8 INTRODUCTION ...... 8 1.1 General ...... 8 1.2 Location of Project ...... 8 1.3 Objective of Project ...... 9 1.4 Scope of Services ...... 10 1.5 Structure of Report ...... 10 1.6 Offices ...... 11

CHAPTER – 2 ...... 11

DETAILED TASK AND METHODOLOGY ...... 11 2.1 Introduction ...... 11 2.2 Traffic Surveys and Demand Assessment ...... 12 2.2.1 Types of surveys ...... 12 2.2.2 Classified Traffic Volume Count ...... 12 2.2.3 Traffic Demand Assessment ...... 12 2.2.4 Intersection Volume Count and Design ...... 13 2.2.5 Pedestrian/ Cattle Crossing Demand Assessment ...... 13 2.2.6 Axle Load Spectrum Surveys ...... 13 2.3 Engineering Surveys and Investigations ...... 13 2.4 Proposal for Sections passing through urban areas ...... 16 2.5 ROBs/RUBs...... 17 2.6 Protective Works in Hill Sections, Retaining Walls, Breast Walls, etc...... 17 2.7 Road Signs, Safety Devices ...... 17 2.8 Toll Plazas ...... 17 2.9 Truck Lay-Byes ...... 17 2.10 Bus Bays and Bus Shelters ...... 17 2.11 Social Impact Assessment ...... 17 2.12 Environment Impact Assessment ...... 18 2.13 Preliminary Designs ...... 18 2.14 Project Cost ...... 19 2.15 Financial Analysis and Bid Process ...... 19 2.3 Methodology...... 19

1 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

CHAPTER 3...... 29

SOCIO- ECONOMIC PROFILE OF PROJECT INFLUENCE...... 29 3.1 Methodology Adopted for Environmental Impact Assessment ...... 29 3.2 Macro Level Baseline ...... 31 3.2.1 Physical Environment ...... 31 3.2.2 Physical Setting ...... 32 3.2.3 Water Resources ...... 33 3.2.4 Ecological Resources ...... 33 3.2.5 Demographic, Social and Socio-Economic Profile ...... 33 3.3.1 Air Quality ...... 34 3.3.2 Noise Level ...... 36 3.3.3 Water Resources and Quality ...... 37 3.3.4 Soil Quality ...... 39 3.3.5 Ecological Resources ...... 40 3.4 Availability of Construction Material ...... 41 3.4.1 Embankment/ Sub-Grade...... 41 3.4.2 Granular Sub-base...... 41 3.4.3 Stone Aggregates ...... 41 3.4.4 Sand ...... 41 3.4.5 Cement, Steel and Bitumen ...... 41 3.4.6 Social Environment ...... 42 3.5 Project Affected People (PAPs)……………………………………………………………………………………. 42

CHAPTER 4...... 43

TRAFFIC SURVEY, ANALYSIS & FORECAST ...... 43 4.1 TRAFFIC SURVEY METHODOLOGY ...... 43 4.1.1 Classified Traffic Volume Counts ...... 46 4.1.2 Origin-Destination Survey ...... 47 4.1.3 Turning Movement Survey ...... 47 4.1.4 Axle Load survey ...... 47 4.2 TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS ...... 49 4.2.1 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ...... 49 4.2.2 Day wise Variation ...... 53 4.2.3 Peak Hour Factor (PHF) ...... 55 4.2.4 Hourly Variation of traffic ...... 56

2 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.2.5 Directional Distribution of Traffic ...... 58 4.2.6 Vehicle Composition ...... 60 4.2.7 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) ...... 62 4.3 TRAVEL PATTERN (ORIGIN – DESTINATION SURVEYS) ...... 63 4.3.1 Sample Size and Expansion Factors ...... 63 4.3.2 Zoning System ...... 64 4.3.3 Regional Distribution ...... 65 4.3.4 Commodity Distribution ...... 74 4.3.5 Trip length frequency Distribution ...... 77 4.4 TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SURVEY ...... 78 4.5 AXLE LOAD SURVEY ...... 78 4.5.1 Vehicle Damage Factor ...... 79 4.6 METHODOLOGY ...... 80 4.6.1 Identification of Alternative Route ...... 81 4.6.2 Assessment of Potential Divertible Traffic ...... 84 4.6.2.1 RC-1: Project road v/s NH-62 for Sojat to Pindwara ...... 87 4.6.2.2 RC-2: Project road v/s NH-62 for Beawar to Pindwara ...... 93 4.6.2.3 RC-3: Project road v/s NH-62 for Sojat to ...... 97 4.7 TRAFFIC ESTIMATION AND FORECAST ...... 109 4.7.1 General ...... 109 4.7.2 Project Road Traffic ...... 109 4.7.2.1 Normal Traffic ...... 109 4.7.2.2 Diverted Traffic ...... 109 4.7.2.3 Induced Traffic ...... 109 4.7.3 Traffic Projections Methodology ...... 109 4.7.4 Project Influence Area (PIA) ...... 110 4.7.5 Socio-Economic Indicators ...... 111 4.7.6 Elasticity Value of Project corridor ...... 112 4.7.7 Adopted Elasticity for different Scenarios ...... 113 4.7.8 Final Traffic Growth Rates ...... 114 4.7.9 Traffic Projections ...... 115 4.7.9.1 Projections of Normal Traffic (with actual growth rates) ...... 115 4.7.9.2 Projections of Traffic including Diverted Traffic (Estimated Growth rates) ...... 115 4.7.9.3 Projections of Normal Traffic excluding Diverted Traffic (5% growth)...... 115 4.7.9.4 Projections of Traffic including Diverted Traffic (5% growth) ...... 115

3 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

CHAPTER 5...... 120

ENGINEERING SURVEY, ANALYSIS & DESIGN ...... 120 5.1 Engineering Surveys and Investigations ...... 120 5.2 Proposal for Sections passing through urban areas ...... 123 5.3 ROBs/RUBs...... 123 5.4 Protective Works in Hill Sections, Retaining Walls, Breast Walls, etc...... 123 5.5 Road Signs, Safety Devices ...... 123 5.6 Toll Plazas ...... 124 5.7 Truck Lay-Byes ...... 124 5.8 Bus Bays and Bus Shelters ...... 124 5.9 Soil and Material Investigation...... 124 5.9.1 General ...... 125 5.9.2 Field Investigation-sampling & Testing……………………………………………………………….……..125 5.9.3 Investigations on Subgrade of Existing Pavement ...... 126 5.9.4 Field Tests and Results ...... 127 5.9.5 Existing Pavement Composition and Analysis ...... 133 5.9.7 Borrow Area Soil ...... 136 5.9.8 Coarse Aggregate (Stone) Materials ...... 137 5.9.9 Fine Aggregate (Sand) Materials ...... 138 5.10 Pavement Design.………………………………………………………………………………………………………139

CHAPTER 6...... 152

DESIGN STANDARD AND SPECIFICATIONS ...... 152 6.1 General ...... 152 6.2 Geometric Design Standards ...... 152 6.2.1 Terrain ...... 153 6.2.2 Design Speed ...... 153 6.2.3 Typical Cross Section ...... 153 6.2.3.1 Right of Way (ROW) ...... 154 6.2.3.2 Land Acquisition ...... 154 6.2.4 General Geometric Design Parameters :- ...... 154 6.2.5 Minimum Transition Length ...... 156 6.2.6 Sight Distance ...... 156 6.2.7 Extra Widening at Horizontal Curves ...... 156 6.2.8 Vertical Alignment ...... 157

4 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

6.2.9 Vertical Clearances ...... 157 6.2.10 Proposal for Vehicle underpass/overpass ...... 157 6.2.11 Standards for Interchange Elements ...... 157 6.2.13 Design Service Volume ...... 158 6.2.14 Pavement Design ...... 158 6.2.14.1 General ...... 158 6.2.14.2 Design Traffic ...... 158 6.2.14.3 Preliminary Structural Design of Pavements ...... 159 6.2.15 Preliminary Design of Structures ...... 159 6.2.15.1 Design Loading ...... 159 6.2.15.2 Carriageway Live Load ...... 159 6.2.15.3 Grade of Concrete ...... 159 6.2.15.4 Foundation ...... 159 6.2.15.5Deck Levels of Structures ...... 160

CHAPTER 7...... 161

IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL (ANNUITY MODE) ...... 161 7.0 Introduction...... 161 7.1 Improvement Proposals...... 161 7.3 Homogeneous Section ...... 161 7.4 Junctions...... 162 7.5 Pavement Design ...... 167 7.5.1 Design Life of Pavement Layers ...... 167 7.5.2 Vehicle Damage Factor………………………………………………………………………………………………169

7.5.3 Design Traffic……………………………………………………………………………………………………………169

7.5.4 Design of New Flexible Pavement ...... 170 7.5.5 Strengthening Layer..…………………………………………………………………………………………………171

7.5.6 Overlay Design as per IRC: 81-1997 ...... 172 7.6 Bypass/Realignment…………………………………………………………………………………………………..173

7.7 Typical Cross Section ...... 179

COST ESTIMATE AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ...... 197 8.1 General ...... 197 8.2 Estimation of Quantities ...... 197 8.3 Site Clearance ...... 197 8.4 Earth Works ...... 197 5 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

8.5 Pavement Material (Flexible) ...... 198 8.6 Cross Drainage Structures, Underpasses & Flyovers ...... 198 8.7 Road Junctions, Interchanges, Bus Stops & Truck Lay-Byes ...... 198 8.8 Road Furniture & Safety Works ...... 198 8.9 Toll Plazas ...... 198 8.10 IDC & Financing Charges ...... 198 8.11 Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation Costs ...... 198 8.12 Relocation of Utilities ...... 199 8.13 Environmental Improvement Works ...... 199 8.14 Project Cost ...... 199 8.15 Operation Maintenance Cost ...... 200

6 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

KEY PLAN OF H-II SOJAT - PINDWARA PROJECT ROAD ON GT SHEET.

7 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

CHAPTER – 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General

The Governor of Rajasthan acting through the Chief Engineer (Road). Public Work Department Government, (the Authority) is engaged in the development of State of Highways and as part of this endeavour, the Authority has decided to undertake two-laning of (i) Km.105 to Km.174 of SH-32 comprising the section from to (“Highway-I”); (ii) Km.35 to Km.212 of SH-62 comprising the section from Sojat to Pindwara (“Highway-II”); (iii) Km 37 to 130 of MDR-26 comprising the section from Jaswantpura to Bhinmal- Chanchwa Phata (“Highway-III”); totalling 323 Kms. (the “Project”) through Public Private Partnership (“PPP”) on Design, Build, Finance, Operate and Transfer (“DBFOT”) basis. The indicative cost of the Project is Rs.650 crore. (Rupees Six Hundred Fifty crore). With a view to inviting bids for the Project Road, the Authority has decided to conduct a feasibility study for determining the technical feasibility and financial viability for the Project Road. If found technically feasible and financially viable, the Project Road may be awarded on DBFOT basis to a private entity (the “Concessionaire”) selected through a competitive bidding process. In pursuance of the above, the Authority has selected a Technical Consultant for preparing the Feasibility Report and bid documents. The Technical Consultant will prepare the Feasibility Report on the basis of detailed site studies and investigations as detailed hereafter and as per specifications, standards and good industry practice to the entire satisfaction of the Authority read with the Manual of Standards and Specifications. M/S Gifford Pvt. Ltd. (Part of Ramboll UK) have been awarded the consultancy assignment for the preparation of Feasibility Report by Rajasthan Public Works Department vide their letter no. LOA No.F7(17)/PPP/2014-15/Package 8/D-1666 dated 21 July 2014. The agreement for the same was signed on 31 July 2014. Following are the details of the Project Roads covered in this Package: Highway-I - Udaipur to Salumbar on SH-32 (Length = 69 kms) Highway-II - Sojat to Pindwara on SH-62 (Length = 161 kms)

Highway-III - Jasawantpura to Bhinmal to Chanchwa Phata on MDR-26 (Length=93 kms) 1.2 Location of Project

The Project corridor is section of SH-62 from Sojat to Pindwara, in this continuous corridor there is an overlapped section of SH-16 (about 16 Km in length), which has been excluded from the original length of 177 Kms. Sojat to Pindwara section has been segregated into Sojat to Desuri and to Pindwara. It takes off at Km 35+000 of SH- 62 near Mode Bhatta Roundabout in and terminates at Km 212 in district connecting to NH-14 at Km 245+140 via Sireeyari, , and small towns/villages. SH-62 also passes through a stretch of reserved forest for a length of around 2.0 Kms (From Km 114+200 to Km 116+200). The length of the project road is approximately 161 Kms.

The Project Road, Sojat – Pindwara is depicted on the map of Rajasthan as follows:

8 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Fig. 1.1 Project Road, Small towns and excluded section shown on Google earth image

1.3 Objective of Project The main objective of the consultancy service is to establish the technical, economical, and financial viability of the project and prepare Feasibility Project Report for rehabilitation and up gradation of existing road to two lane / four lane configuration. The objective of this consultancy is to undertake feasibility studies and prepare a

Feasibility Report of theNearest Project village Highway for the purpose of firming up the Authority’s Sansari at 550m Population 3992 9 Draft Feasibility Report

Nearest village Amaliya at 200m Population 1224 Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

requirements in respect of development and construction of the Project Highway, Project Facilities and enabling the prospective bidders to assess the Authority’s requirements in a clear and predictable manner with a view to ensuring:

(i) enhanced safety and level of service for the road users; a) superior operation and maintenance enabling enhanced operational efficiency of the Project Highway; (ii) minimal adverse impact on the local population and road users due to road Construction; (iii) minimal adverse impact on environment; (iv) minimal additional acquisition of land; and 1.4 Scope of Services The existing project is varying from single to intermediate lane configuration. It has to be widened to 2 Lane / 2 lane with Granular shoulder depending upon the traffic. The scope of services for the present study is described as follows:-

(i) Traffic surveys and demand assessment (ii) Engineering surveys and investigations (iii) Location and layout of toll plazas (iv) Location and layout of truck lay byes (v) Location and layout of bus bays / bus shelters (vi) Wayside amenities (vii) Safety (viii) Social impact assessment (ix) Environment impact assessment (x) Preliminary designs of road, bridges, structures, etc. (xi) Preparation of Land Plan Schedules and Utility Relocation Plans (xii) Preparation of indicative BOQ and rough Cost Estimates (xiii) Preparation of Schedules A, B, C, D and H of the Concession Agreement.

The services as mentioned above are following with reference to RFP.

1.5 Structure of Report

The Draft Feasibility Report is structured to contain one volume with Chapters as given below :

Chapter-I: Introduction Chapter 2: Detailed Task & Methodology Chapter 3: Socio-Economic profile of Project influence Chapter 4: Traffic Survey, Analysis & Forecast

Chapter 5: Engineering Survey, Analysis & Design including CL/GPS

Chapter 6: Design Standards

10 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Chapter 7: Improvement Proposals Chapter 8: Cost Estimate & Financial Analysis

1.6 Offices The consultant is located in their permanent office at Gurgaon –

Regional Office in India is located at: Gifford India Pvt.Ltd.(part of Ramboll) Level-17,Tower-B, Building No.5, DLF City, Phase-III, Gurgaon-122002 Phone-91+124-4611999 E-mail: [email protected] & info@ramboll

Following are the major contact points related to all the project queries:-

1. Surender Aggarwal :- Project Manager/Associate Director Mobile No.:- 9871866437/9811288437

2. Gagan Trivedi :- Team Leader cum Senior Highway Engineer Mobile No.:-0 9910070089

CHAPTER – 2

DETAILED TASK AND METHODOLOGY 2.1 Introduction The existing project is varying from intermediate lane to two lane configuration. It has to be widened to 2 Lane / 2 lane with Granular shoulder depending upon the traffic. The scope of services for the present study is described as follows:-

(i) Traffic surveys and demand assessment (ii) Engineering surveys and investigations (iii) Location and layout of toll plazas (iv) Location and layout of truck lay byes

11 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

(v) Location and layout of bus bays / bus shelters (vi) Wayside amenities (vii) Safety (viii) Social impact assessment (ix) Environment impact assessment (x) Preliminary designs of road, bridges, structures, etc. (xi) Preparation of Land Plan Schedules and Utility Relocation Plans (xii) Preparation of indicative BOQ and rough Cost Estimates (xiii) Preparation of Schedules A, B, C, D and H of the Concession Agreement. The services as mentioned above are briefly explained hereunder.

2.2 Traffic Surveys and Demand Assessment

2.2.1 Types of surveys The types of traffic surveys and the minimum number of survey stations shall be as under:

Description of S. No. Number of Survey Stations Activity One station close to the proposed location of Classified Traffic 1. each Toll Plaza and one station for every 25 Volume Count km of Project Highway. All major intersections (All locations where the Intersection Volume 2. Project Highway intersects or meets a Count NH/SH/MDR). Pedestrian/Cattle At all locations of settlements/habitations 3. crossing traffic count along the Project Highway One station each close to the proposed 4. Axle Load Spectrum location of each Toll Plaza

The Consultant shall, upon award of the Consultancy, submit its proposal regarding the locations of traffic survey stations for each of the above activities along with an index plan giving the rationale of its proposal. Care shall be taken in proposing the locations in a manner that they capture the traffic in different sections. The Authority within one week of receiving the Inception Report may modify the locations of traffic survey stations in accordance with the provisions of this TOR and ask the Consultant to comply and carry out the field surveys.

2.2.2 Classified Traffic Volume Count For conducting the traffic volume count, the Consultant shall comply with the following: (i) The classified traffic volume counts shall be carried out for 7 continuous days at the selected survey stations as per IRC guidelines (IRC: 9-1972). (ii) The traffic count data would be analysed to depict hourly and daily variations. The Abstract of traffic data would also be provided for each survey station The proposed format for traffic volume count is attached in Annexure-1.

2.2.3 Traffic Demand Assessment a) The Consultant shall make an assessment of the traffic demand for the Project Highway for a period of 10 (ten) years, 15 (fifteen) years and 20 (twenty) years respectively based on analysis of traffic counts, growth and growth in the project influence area of the Project Highway. Normally, an annual growth rate of 5%

12 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

(five per cent) shall be assumed. Any variation shall have to be justified with reasons, including analysis of past trends. b) Based on the assessment of the traffic demand on the various sections of the Project, the Consultant shall discuss the options of Two-laning or Two-laning with granular shoulders in the first stage. The Consultant shall also provide sensitivity analysis due to change in assumption of traffic projections. 2.2.4 Intersection Volume Count and Design a) Volume Count: For conducting the intersection volume count, the turning movement traffic surveys shall be carried out as per IRC: SP:41-1994 at all locations where the Project Highway intersects/meets the NH, SH or MDR. The turning movement surveys will be undertaken from 08:00 to 12:00 hours in the morning and 16:00 to 20:00 hours in the evening. The formats for conducting TMC are enclosed in Annexure-1. (i) The data at each location shall be presented and analysed to identify suitable treatment viz. at-grade intersection, grade separator without ramps or interchange with ramps in the light of warrants and criteria specified in the Manual. The type and layout proposed by the Consultant for each location shall be furnished along with the analysis supporting the same. Where an interchange with ramp is indicated by the analysis, its type should be determined keeping in view the site conditions. (ii) The amount of additional land required, if any, at each of the intersection on the Project Highway shall be clearly stated and brought out. (iii) For all cases where grade separators without ramps or interchanges with ramps are proposed, the possibility of their provision on the Project Highway in a phased manner shall be duly examined and a report on the cost-effectiveness of the Consultant’s proposal submitted for consideration of the Authority to enable it to specify such requirements in the relevant Schedules of the Contract Agreement. 2.2.5 Pedestrian/ Cattle Crossing Demand Assessment For assessing the requirements of Pedestrian / Cattle crossings, the traffic counts for two continuous days between 08.00 hours and 20.00 hours shall be carried out at the locations close to all habitations/ settlements along the Project Highway. The data so collected shall be analysed to determine whether any pedestrian/cattle crossing by way of underpass/ overpass is justified. If so, the locations and broad layout shall be proposed. 2.2.6 Axle Load Spectrum Surveys Axle load spectrum surveys shall be carried out at each proposed location of toll plaza on the Project Highway. The axle load survey shall capture buses, trucks and tractors with trailers in the traffic stream. The survey shall be for both directions. Sample size shall not be less than 10% (ten per cent) of the buses, trucks and tractors with trailers in the traffic stream and based on standard statistical techniques. The vehicle damage factor shall be calculated as per the equivalency factors given in IRC: 37.The format for field axle load survey is provided in Annexure-1. 2.3 Engineering Surveys and Investigations

2.3.1 The engineering surveys and investigations shall be divided into the following components: x Topographic, alignment and land use survey x Road inventory survey 13 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

x Road condition survey x Bridge condition survey x Soil, geo-technical, material, hydrology and drainage surveys

2.3.2 Topographic, Alignment and Land Use Survey The activities and deliverables forming part of the topographic, alignment and land use survey are described below: (a) Divide the Project Highway into various stretches as per terrain classification. (b) Identity section of Project which fall within marine environment (Condition of severe marine environment: alternate wetting and drying due to sea spray; alternate wetting and drying combined with freezing; buried in soil having corrosive effect; members of structures in contact with water where the velocity of flow and the bed material are likely to cause erosion of concrete. Moderate marine environment would be other than severe).

(c) Identify sections of Project Highway which fall within urban limits and need four laning in accordance with the Manual (see para 3.4). (d) Identify sections of Project Highway which require rising. Such sections will be identified with attention being paid to the previous history of submergence and the extent to which the subgrade is likely to be affected by the capillary action if the section is not raised. (e)) As far as possible, the existing alignment would be retained subject to the following requirements: (i) Identify stretches which do not meet the criterion of ruling design speed, i.e. where radii of horizontal curves are less than desirable minimum. Prepare realignment plans for improving geometrics in such stretches. (ii) Identify stretches out of (i) above, which meet the criterion of minimum design speed, i.e. where the radii of horizontal curves are more than the absolute minimum (This will enable the Authority to take a view on whether to include such stretches for improving geometrics in the initial stage or these can be postponed by a few years and in the meantime steps can be taken to acquire the necessary land for the ROW). (iii) Identify stretches where stopping sight distance is not available. Work out possible improvement plan to increase the sight distance to provide overtaking sight distance. Also work out option to increase the sight distance to provide at least the intermediate sight distance. (iv) Identify stretches, other than those in (iii) above, where intermediate sight distance is not available. Work out possible improvement plan to increase the sight distance to provide overtaking sight distance. Also work out possible improvement plan to increase the sight distance to provide at least the intermediate sight distance. (v) Identify stretches where the gradients are steeper than the ruling gradient for the relevant terrain condition. Work out and prepare an improvement plan for the vertical alignment in such stretches. Divide improvement plans of such stretches into the following two parts: í Stretches where gradient is more than the limiting gradient í Stretches where gradient is more than the ruling gradient but less than the limiting gradient. (The Authority can take a view on whether improvements of stretches in this category shall be taken up or not.) (vi) Identify stretches where extra width of roadway and carriageway at curves is required. 14 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

(a) Identify stretches involving construction of new bridges and other grade separated structures including those requiring reconstruction and their approaches. Work out proposal for location of such structures and alignment of approaches. (b) Based on the improvement plans of horizontal and vertical alignment worked out as a result of tasks in (d), (e) and (f), prepare alignment plans, L-Sections and cross- sections of the entire Project Highway. Scale of drawings shall be as per IRC:SP:19. Proposed improvements shall be marked on the plans. Such improvements will include raising of road, widening of roadway, widening of existing carriageway, location of median and the side on which the new two-lane carriageway is to be provided, provision of shoulders – both paved and granular, new structures, underpasses, grade separators, service roads, additional road signs, road furniture, safety devices, relocation of utilities, removal of trees, etc. (c) Also prepare a separate Land Plan of the Project Highway showing the existing ROW (along with all the existing assets within the ROW e.g. structures, drains, service roads, trees, utilities and safety devices) and proposed additional land required in various stretches for improvement of geometrics, construction of new structures, provision of intersections, interchanges, service roads, toll plazas, project facilities, etc. The Land Plan should also show encroachments, if any. A list of such encroachments along with their brief description shall also be prepared and included in the Feasibility Report. (d) For additional land proposed to be acquired as per final alignment plan of the Project Highway, the Land Plans shall be marked on duly certified village maps showing khasra numbers and shall be furnished along with a report which will include detailed schedules in respect of the proposed acquisition of land holdings as per revenue records in a format that would enable the Authority to initiate land acquisition proceedings. (e) A set of cross-sections of the existing road including urban sections at one km intervals for each homogeneous section in plain/rolling terrain and at 100 m intervals in mountainous/steep terrain shall be provided by the Consultant. In plain/ rolling terrain, additional cross-sections shall be provided for curves at the start, at the middle and at the end. These cross-sections along with proposed improvement plan and preliminary design shall form the basis of preparation of indicative BOQ for the Project Highway. 2.3.3 Road Inventory Survey Deliverables under this component shall include: (a) An inventory of road, culverts, bridges and other structures like railway over-bridges /under passes, flyovers (grade separated structures), underpasses and overpasses. (b) Identification of stretches of the Project Highway which - (i) are affected by frequent flooding; (ii) are subjected to water logging; (iii) pass through black cotton soil area; (iv) pass through marshy area; or (v) pass through weak soil stratum (c) Typical cross-sections of the existing road showing the crust composition of pavement shoulders and drains (one cross-section for every five km of the road). (d) Identification of sections in cutting. (e) Identification of culverts requiring: (i) Reconstruction (all culverts which are structurally distressed shall be reconstructed as new structures). (ii) Widening (all existing culverts which are not to be reconstructed shall be widened equal to the roadway width).

15 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

(iii) Repairs and/or rehabilitation along with preliminary proposals. (iv) New construction 2.3.4 Road Condition Survey The Consultant shall undertake a survey of the visual condition of the pavement and shoulders of the Project Highway and provide its report as per Proforma-4 of Annexure- 1. The Consultant should also report if distresses are observed in the pavement and shoulders. It will also identify sections requiring reconstruction. 2.3.5 Bridge Condition Survey The activities and Deliverables forming part of bridge condition survey are specified below: (a) The Consultant shall carry out a detailed inspection of every bridge and other structures such as railway over/under bridges, overpasses, underpasses and grade separators including flyovers. (For guidance, see IRC: SP: 35 and IRC: SP: 52). (b) For each structure, the Consultant shall indicate the distresses observed, if any, in respect of various components of the structures e.g. bearings, expansion joints, wearing coat, railings/crash-barriers, foundations, substructures (abutments, piers, pier caps), superstructure (Proforma-5). On the basis of the distresses observed, the Consultant shall divide the structures into the following categories: (i) structures requiring reconstruction immediately as part of first stage development (all such structures shall be provided as new structures); (ii) structures where distresses are not so severe and reconstruction can be postponed to a subsequent stage say for a period of 7 to 8 years; if any major repairs are required in the meantime, these shall be so indicated for each such location; (iii) structures requiring repairs and/or rehabilitation (for such structures indicate preliminary proposals for repairs and/or rehabilitation); (iv) structures requiring widening (for such structures indicate widening methodology); and (v) Structures that shall be retained.

2.3.6 Soil, Geotechnical, Material, Hydrology and Drainage Surveys The activities and Deliverables forming part of the soil, geotechnical, material, hydrology and drainage surveys are described below: (a) The characteristics of the existing soil, two samples from every five km of the Project Highway or closer where change in soil type is encountered. (b) The determination of subgrade CBR (soaked) every three km of the Project Highway or closer where change in soil type is encountered. (c) Benkelman Beam Deflection measurements on the Project Highway – one set of ten readings in 250 m for every three km of the Project Highway. (d) Investigations of the subsoil strata (one trial bore and/or test pit at embankment and one in river bed at locations where new bridges or other structures are proposed. The depth of trial bore/ test pit shall be as per IRC standards). (e) Preliminary hydraulic data for bridges, design discharge, HFL, LWL, etc. with a view to checking adequacy of existing waterway. (f) A broad assessment of the drainage condition and requirement of the Project Highway. 2.4 Proposal for Sections passing through urban areas The consultant would identify the stretches of the Project Highway which pass through the urban areas. For each of these stretches, the Consultant shall prepare an improvement plan of the stretch to provide a four-lane divided carriageway with footpaths, covered drains, etc. Possibility of providing service roads shall also be

16 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

explored and indicated. If there is any constraint due to available ROW or additional land to be acquired, the same shall be brought to the attention of the Authority on immediate basis. In such situations, a bypass may be needed to avoid the urban area. 2.5 ROBs/RUBs The Consultant shall identify all locations of the existing railway level crossings on the Project Highway. Data regarding number of closures per day shall be provided. Normally, all level crossings are to be replaced with ROBs/RUBs. However, the Consultant may propose retention of such railway crossings which are on sidings etc. where it would not be cost-effective to replace them with ROBs/RUBs. The Consultant shall prepare and submit indicative GADs of the proposed ROBs/RUBs including viaduct portion in the approaches based on preliminary consultation with the railway authorities concerned. (The GAD of ROBs/RUBs existing or under construction in the vicinity of the Project Highway could also be kept in view). 2.6 Protective Works in Hill Sections, Retaining Walls, Breast Walls, etc. For the stretches passing through hills, the Consultant shall identify the broad requirements of retaining walls, breast walls, etc. for the purposes of preparing rough cost estimates. 2.7 Road Signs, Safety Devices (a) The Consultant shall propose provision of Road Signs, Pavement Markings, Safety Barriers, Railings, Delineators, Chevron Markings, Traffic Attenuators, Road Boundary Stones, Km Stones, 200 m Stones. It shall also include Crash Barriers for existing bridges. (b) The Consultant shall propose overhead signs on the Project Highway and provide an outline of the same giving size and location. 2.8 Toll Plazas The Consultant shall investigate and propose suitable location(s) for the Toll Plaza(s), keeping in view the requirements laid down in the Toll Rules, Model Agreement for EPC and the Manual. It shall provide a typical layout plan for each Toll Plaza and indicate the additional land required keeping in view the requirements laid down in the Manual.

2.9 Truck Lay-Byes The Consultant shall undertake field surveys and identify suitable locations for provision of truck laybyes on the Project Highway. Truck laybyes shall, in general, be located near check-barriers, interstate borders, places of conventional stops of the truck operators etc. The length of each such truck laybye shall also be indicated. 2.10 Bus Bays and Bus Shelters The Consultant shall undertake field surveys and identify suitable locations for provision of bus bays and bus shelters on the Project Highway. As far as possible, bus bays shall not be located on horizontal curves, summit of vertical curves and bridges. Good visibility must be ensured. Further, the bus bays should not be too close to major intersections. The length of each such bus bay shall also be indicated. The Consultant shall also indicate the locations of bus stands/bus stops provided by the concerned State Transport Authorities on the Project Highway. 2.11 Social Impact Assessment The Consultant shall undertake social impact assessment due to the improvements proposed on the Project Highway, especially the persons affected due to the Project and requiring resettlement and rehabilitation. The extant policies and guidelines of the government would be kept in view while undertaking the assessment. The consultant 17 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

shall prepare a plan for involuntary resettlement and land acquisition, which shall include the following: (a) Prepare in accordance with guidelines of the Government, a draft Resettlement and Land Acquisition Plan; (b) Prepare area specific social assessments to support development of a locally relevant approach to resettlement which provides benefits to people in the Project’s area of influence, which include socioeconomic conditions, social service infrastructure, and social institutions and organization, in accordance with the Government policies and guidelines; (c) These social assessments should include gender and local ethnic aspects; (d) Provide recommendations and action plan for the Contractor to undertake, at the detailed design stage, a full census and inventory of lost assets (households, shops and agricultural and other lands, or access to current income-generating activities, including impacts caused by permanent or temporary acquisition) of affected people and a baseline socioeconomic survey of the affected population. Determine the scope and magnitude of likely resettlement and land acquisition effects, and list likely losses of households, agricultural lands, business and income opportunities, as well as affected communal assets and public buildings; (e) In consultation with local stakeholders, government and the Authority, develop an entitlement matrix, on the basis of the consultations, socioeconomic surveys, and inventories of losses that will determine the amount of compensation in accordance with the guidelines and policies of the Government; (f) Prepare the plans with full stakeholder participation, including the Government and the Authority. Consult with affected persons and community-based organizations to ensure that all affected persons have been fully informed of their entitlements through the consultative processes initiated by the Government and the Authority. Ensure that communities and displaced persons understand the project, its impacts, and the responsibilities of the parties; and (g) Analyse and confirm the following aspects that will apply to land acquisition and resettlement in the project area: (i) laws and regulations, including local practices; (ii) budgetary processes for involuntary resettlement and land acquisition; (iii) schedules for these activities that are coordinated with the construction schedule; and (iv) administrative arrangements and requirements. 2.12 Environment Impact Assessment (a) The Consultant shall undertake environment impact assessment of the Project Highway as per provisions of the Applicable Laws on environment protection and identify a package of measures to reduce/eliminate the adverse impact identified during the assessment. An environmental impact assessment report and environmental management plan shall be prepared based on such assessment. The management plan shall include project specific mitigation and monitoring measures for identified impacts as well as management and monitoring plans to address them. (b) The Consultant shall also assist the Authority in conducting public hearings and addressing the comments and suggestions received during the EIA process with a view to getting environmental clearance from the competent authority. 2.13 Preliminary Designs The Consultant shall arrive at the preliminary designs of various components of the Project Highway keeping in view the requirements of the Manual and the scope of services described in this TOR. The consultant shall be responsible for the accuracy of the physical details such as alignment, right of way, abutting land use, assets within the right of way including safety devices, utilities, trees, service roads, cross drainage 18 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

structures, etc. The layout and preliminary designs shall be supplemented with explanatory drawings, statements, charts, notes as necessary. 2.14 Project Cost The Consultant shall work out indicative BOQ of various components and prepare rough cost estimates of the Project Highway with a break up of cost for each component separately. To the construction cost so arrived at, the Consultant may add 25% (twenty five per cent) thereof as a lump sum provision for physical and price contingencies, interest during construction and other financing costs, pre-construction expenses etc. 2.15 Financial Analysis and Bid Process Detailed financial analysis is not required to be undertaken by the Consultant. However, the Consultant shall provide the estimated construction costs, operation and maintenance costs, traffic forecast, toll revenues etc. as part of its preliminary financial analysis and appraisal of the Project. The Consultant shall, also provide a preliminary assessment of the financial viability of the Project with a view to estimating the likely IRR over a concession period of 10 (ten) years, 15 (fifteen) years, 20 (twenty) years and 25 (twenty five) years respectively. It shall also provide assistance during the Bid Process for selection of the Concessionaire.

While undertaking the financial analysis and projecting the IRR, the following assumptions shall be adopted: b. Capital cost shall be adopted as per estimates of construction cost to which 25% (twenty five per cent) shall be added for physical and price contingencies, interest during construction, other financing costs etc; c. debt equity ratio may be assumed as 70:30; d. O&M costs may be assumed as per norms of the Authority; e. the concession period may be fixed by reference to the year in which the projected traffic would exceed the design capacity of the Project Highway; and f. growth rate of traffic may be assumed at 5% (five per cent) per annum. g. Calculate the NPV and EIRR for the Project. It will undertake sensitivity analysis by identifying the most critical factors and determine their impact on the EIRR, including varying project costs and benefits, implementation period, and combinations of these factors; and h. Conduct a risk analysis by considering the possible values for key variables based on records, and their occurrence probability. If the IRR of the Project, based on the aforesaid calculations is less than 12% (twelve per cent), an effort should be made to reduce the capital costs in consultation with the Authority. This may be done either by omitting/ modifying some of the proposed structures or by phasing them after a period of seven years or more, such that the IRR reaches 12%.

2.3 Methodology The proposed methodology has been based on the understanding of the existing nature and topography of area along with traffic characteristics on main carriageway. Data/information has been collected during the reconnaissance along the project area and also the meetings and discussions held with the concerned PWD officials. Consultants propose to carry out all the activities outlined in TOR using state-of-the art technology, latest system, equipment and machinery. Additional studies would also be

19 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

taken up as per project requirement and as appropriate. Brief outline for carrying out survey, data collection and analysis is given below: Field studies covering topographic field surveys, traffic, environmental aspects, socio- economic conditions (R&R) and identification of additional land requirements for improving geometrics where ruling design speed requirements are not met, availability of construction materials in the vicinity of project would be the essential tasks for the assignment. The field studies would be performed as per the stipulations of the TOR. The Consultants would use the total station, digital/automatic levels and GPS while carrying out the topographic field surveys. The data collected in the site office would be downloaded to the notebook computers for further processing and analysis after pre- processing and validation in the site office. The processing of the field survey data and the generation of the road drawings would be based on “digital terrain modeling” using Mx Suite software. Gifford India Pvt. Ltd has in possession sufficient licenses for the use of this software. The traffic data would be analysed using the proven methods along project road and traffic assessment based on the various Traffic Model. Traffic demand estimates would be based on economic indicators besides the time-series data. All traffic surveys as stipulated in Terms of Reference (TOR) shall be carried out after getting prior approval from PWD on the locations of traffic surveys. It is a feasibility study to formulate the proposals of junction improvements with different options. Based on an in-depth study of the scope of services contained in the TOR for the project, the consultants have evolved a methodology wherein the work has been divided into a set of Task Series further broken down into individual tasks, which are reflected as under: Table 3.1: Task Series and Task Elements

Task ID Description Series Task Element 0100 Inception Report 0110 Mobilization and commencement of work 0120 Start-up Meeting 0130 Methodology and Work Programme 0140 Site Appreciation 0150 Proposal for location of Traffic survey locations and Toll Plaza locations 0160 Design Standards 0170 Preparation / Submission of Inception report 0200 Supplementary Inception Report 0210 Conducting traffic survey covered in TOR 0220 Structure of project to make it viable 0230 Submission of Supplementary Inception Report 0300 Report on Alignment and First Traffic Survey 0310 Identify Geometric deficiencies 0320 Identify construction of new bridges and grade separators 0330 Propose Geometric improvements 0340 Report on Alignment 0350 Report on 7days CVC

0400 Land Plan Schedules 0410 Preparation of Land Plan ( existing features) 0420 Improvement and Bypass Proposal 0430 Preparation of Land Plan (proposed features)

20 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Task ID Description Series Task Element 0500 Utility Relocation Plans 0510 Preparation of preliminary relocation plans 0520 Preparation of preliminary costs for shifting/relocation

0600 Report on Environmental and Social Impact Assessment 0610 Preparation of EIA report 0620 Preparation of SIA report

0700 Report on Indicative GAD of Structures 0710 Report on Indicative GAD of Bridges, ROB/RUBs and Grade Separators

0800 Feasibility Report Preparation 0810 Preparation of Highway Drawings 0811 Index Plan of project 0812 Preparation of Alignment layout with geometric/structural/pavement related improvement proposals superimposed on existing alignment 0813 Preparation of vertical profile 0814 Preparation of Typical cross sections 0820 Preparation of Investigation Reports 0821 Report on traffic survey and demand assessment 0822 Road inventory survey 0823 Road condition survey 0824 Bridge inventory and condition survey 0825 Soil, geotechnical and drainage report

0830 Preliminary Designs 0831 Traffic and toll forecasting for 10,15,20 & 25 years 0832 Preliminary pavement design 0833 Widening/improvement proposals for bridges and culverts 0834 Preliminary drainage assessment 0835 Preliminary layout of intersections, grade separators and interchanges with ramps

0840 Preliminary costing 0841 Indicative BOQ 0842 Preliminary Cost Estimate for construction of Project Highway 0843 Estimation of Total project cost

0850 Schedules of Contract Agreement 0851 Provide Schedules A, B,C,D,H and I of the CA

0860 Financial Analysis 0861 Preliminary financial assessment of project ( likely IRR for 10,15,20,25 years) 0862 Estimate likely viability gap funding

0900 Final Feasibility Report 0910 Review PWD comments and Revise Draft Report 0911 Review PWD comments in context of codal provisions and site requirements 0912 Comments to be complied in report & preliminary design 1000 Assistance during Bid process 1010 Assist to financial consultant and legal advisor during preparation of Bid 1020 documents 1030 Participate in Pre-bid conferences Reply to Pre-bid queries

21 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

0100 Inception Report

0110 Mobilization and Commencement of Work

Contract agreement was signed on 31st July, 2014 between PWD and the Consultant and commencement of services has taken place from 5th August 2014. The consultants have already mobilized the Team Leader, other professionals for carrying out the assignment. 0120 Start-Up Meeting

Team met the Executive Engineer, Mr. Shailender Singh Chauhan and conducted a joint visit on 02.08.14 with the Assistant Engineer. Team Leader along with Project Manager also met the nodal officer Mr. Govind Singh Chauhan, Executive Engineer, Bali as mentioned in the RFP document to understand the project road in more details. 0130 Methodology and Work Programme

Based on the discussions held with PWD officials during start-up meeting, the work programme and methodology were reviewed and refined. Any modifications to the scope of work would be identified, discussed and resolved prior to the commencement of subsequent activities. Any change in the methodology and approach and the impact of change on the time schedule and costs would be identified and intimated. 0140 Site Appreciation

0141 Field Reconnaissance and Alignment Survey

The consultants carried out the field reconnaissance of the project stretch. The aim of this filed reconnaissance was to familiarize the team members with the project area and its characteristics. 0142 Road Inventory

Detailed road inventory data is to be collected as per Proforma-1 of Schedule-1 of TOR. It is also in accordance with IRC:SP-19. 0150 Proposal for locations of Traffic survey locations and Toll Plaza

Site visit is also made by Traffic expert along with Team leader to propose locations of Traffic survey locations and Toll Plaza.

0160 Design Standards

Design Standards for geometric design of highway have been framed for the various items of the project. Design standards are framed for providing the desirable level of service, safety and soundness of highway. For the present project it is proposed to follow Design standards as per IRC Standards, Guidelines and Special Publications besides MORT&H circulars and specifications and any other International guidelines and specification. 0170 Preparation and Submission of Inception Report

The Inception Report outlines the consultants’ initial findings and confirms the methodology and detailed work programme, proposed solutions and actions required to facilitate the successful completion of studies.

0200 Supplementary Inception Report 22 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

0210 Traffic Field Studies along the Project Road

The traffic survey team has already been finalized. Following traffic surveys shall be conducted as per clause 3.2.1 of TOR after PWD approval:-

x Classified traffic volume count x Turning movement count at Major junctions x Axle load spectrum survey x Pedestrian cum cattle crossing volume count x OD surveys

0220 Formulation of project for its viability

The consultant shall spell out broad strategy for structuring the project in a manner that would restrict the likely viability gap funding to a level not exceeding 20% of the capital cost of the project assuming an IRR of minimum 12%. The Consultant shall provide the estimated construction costs, operation and maintenance costs, traffic forecast, toll revenues etc. as part of its preliminary financial analysis and appraisal of the Project. The Consultant shall, also provide a preliminary assessment of the financial viability of the Project with a view to estimating the likely IRR over a concession period of 10 (ten) years, 15 (fifteen) years, 20 (twenty) years and 25 (twenty five) years respectively. It shall also provide assistance during the Bid Process for selection of the Contractor.

0230 Preparation and Submission of Supplementary Inception Report

The Inception Report outlines the consultants’ initial findings and confirms the methodology and detailed work programme, proposed solutions and actions required to facilitate the successful completion of studies. The Supplementary Inception Report is prepared in five copies for submission to PWD.

0300 Report on Alignment and First Traffic survey

0310 Identify Geometric Design Deficiencies

0320 Identify Construction of New Bridges and Grade Separators

Widening scheme shall be prepared for existing bridges and requirement of construction of new bridges shall be identified.

0330 Propose Geometric Improvements

Based on PWD approval, geometric design improvements shall be proposed. Alignment shall be finalised based on PWD suggestions and feedback.

0340 Report on Alignment

A comprehensive alignment report based on activities in 0310 to 0340 shall be provided to PWD.

0350 Report on first 7-day Classified Traffic Volume Count

A comprehensive traffic report based on traffic surveys, analysis and forecasting shall be provided to PWD.

0400 Land Plan Schedules

23 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

0410 Preparation of Land Plan (existing features)

Based on topographic survey data, the consultants would prepare the land plan showing all the existing features and ROW of the road and also the cross roads. The land plan will also depict the followings existing features:-

x Structures x Drains x Service roads x Trees x Utilities x Safety devices x Newly constructed structures x Any encroachments

0420 Improvement and Bypass Proposal

Consultant will prepare the alternative routes for bypass stretch and will give merits and demerits of each route based on engineering and economic considerations. Improvement of existing road will also be presented with feasible design and drawings. Due consideration will be given to fulfil the local community requirements. Consultant will prepare the drawings of various alternatives for approval of PWD.

0430 Preparation of Land Plan (Proposed Features)

The land plan will also depict the additional land to be acquired for followings:-

x Improvement of geometrics x Construction of proposed structures x Provision of intersections/interchanges/service roads x Provision of Toll plaza and project facilities etc. x Safety devices x Newly constructed structures

0500 Utility Relocation Plan

0510 Preparation of Preliminary Relocation Plans

Consultant will prepare the preliminary plans for identifying different type of utilities to be relocated. AutoCAD drawings shall be prepared identifying location of shifted utilities.

0520 Preparation of Preliminary Relocation Estimate

Consultant will prepare the preliminary cost estimate for identifying different type of utilities to be relocated.

0600 Report on Environmental and social Assessment

0610 Preparation of Preliminary EIA Report

The Consultant shall undertake environment impact assessment of the Project Highway as per provisions of the Applicable Laws on environment protection and identify a package of measures to reduce/eliminate the adverse impact identified during the assessment. An environmental impact assessment report and environmental 24 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

management plan shall be prepared based on such assessment. The management plan shall include project specific mitigation and monitoring measures for identified impacts as well as management and monitoring plans to address them.

The Consultant shall also assist the Authority in conducting public hearings and addressing the comments and suggestions received during the EIA process with a view to getting environmental clearance from the competent authority.

0620 Preparation of Preliminary SIA Report

Consultant will prepare the preliminary environmental report for the project corridor. The Consultant shall undertake social impact assessment due to the improvements proposed on the Project Highway, especially the persons affected due to the Project and requiring resettlement and rehabilitation. The extant policies and guidelines of the government would be kept in view while undertaking the assessment. He shall prepare a plan for involuntary resettlement and land acquisition, which shall be including a draft Resettlement and Land Acquisition Plan.

0710 Report on Indicative GAD of Structures

Based upon geometric improvements and widening schedule, preliminary GAD of structures for culverts, bridges, flyovers and grade separators shall be prepared.

0800 Feasibility Report

Feasibility report of the project will include the preparation and submission of deliverables as covered in Task No. 0810,0820,0830,0840.

0810 Preparation of Highway drawings

Consultant will prepare following drawings as per TOR.

0811 Index Plan

Index Plan shall be prepared on Google Images and Maps to show the salient features and landmarks of the project.

0812 Preparation of Alignment Plan, Vertical Profile and Typical Cross Section Drawings

Consultant will prepare the existing alignment layout and will propose geometric improvements. After discussing with PWD, proposed alignment layout will be prepared. Once PWD approves the alignment layout then vertical profile shall be prepared. MX software shall be used for Highway Geometric design. Typical cross sections drawings shall be prepared for different sections of the project. Typical miscellaneous drawings related to crash barrier, road marking and traffic signage shall be prepared.

0812 Preparation of Alignment Plan

Consultant will prepare the existing alignment layout and will propose geometric improvements. After discussing with PWD, proposed alignment layout will be prepared.

0813 Preparation of Vertical Profile

Once PWD approves the proposed alignment layout then vertical profile shall be prepared. MX software shall be used for Highway Geometric design. 25 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

0814 Preparation of Typical Cross Section Drawings

Typical cross sections shall be prepared for different sections of the project. Typical miscellaneous drawings related to crash barrier, road marking and traffic signage shall be prepared.

0820 Preparation of Investigation Reports

After completing field investigations i.e. traffic surveys, road inventory, road condition, BBD survey, bridge condition, soil & material investigations following reports shall be prepared as per TOR.

0821 Report on Traffic Survey and Demand Assessment

After completing CVC, TMC, Axle load surveys, origin- destination surveys on project corridor, all the data shall be analysed and forecasting shall be done. Suitable cost effective treatments i.e. type of junctions, interchanges as per IRC: SP-41 and IRC:92 shall be proposed.

0822 Report on Road Inventory

As per IRC: SP19, inventory will cover all road related components. Specific stretches shall be identified e.g. subjected to frequent flooding, water logging, black cotton area, land slide areas, marshy, cutting section etc.

0823 Report on Road Condition Survey & BBD

As per IRC: SP-19, a report on road condition survey based on visual assessment along with BBD field investigations shall be prepared. Homogenous sections shall be identified.

0824 Report on Bridge Inventory & Condition Survey

As per IRC: SP19, a report on bridge condition survey based on visual assessment shall be prepared.

0825 Report on Soil and Material Investigation Survey

As per IRC: SP19, a report on following soil/material surveys conducted at site shall be prepared.

Sl. No. Description / Scope of Work

01 Test Pit Investigation (Field Work)

- Subgrade Strength Test Pits: x At the rate of 1 sample for every 2.5 Km interval (65 nos.) x Field & Laboratory Testing as per codal provisions x Field Tests x Dynamic Cone Penetration Test x Field Moisture Content & Field Dry Density Determination x Pavement Crust Thickness Measurement x Laboratory Tests x Soil Classification x Sieve Analysis 26 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

x Atterberg Limits x Laboratory Compaction Test (Modified Proctor Test) x 4 day soaked CBR at 3 energy levels x Free swell index x Analysis of test Results and Recommendations x Soil investigations Report 02 Material Investigation

2a) Borrow Area Soil:

x Identification of potential borrow areas within the reasonable lead distance for embankment and subgrade construction (approx.1 sample for every 10 km length) x Lab Tests: Grain size analysis, Soil Classification, Atterberg Limit, Modified Proctor Tests, Single energy levels CBR Test & Free Swell Index. x Subgrade Strength Test Pits (apprx. 2 per Road)

2b) Aggregate Quarry

x Identification of potential aggregate quarry’s (Stone and Sand) inclusive of natural GSB materials. (appox. nos: 2 stone quarry, 1 sand quarry for every 50km length)

x Lab Tests: (Stone); Sieve Analysis, Gradation, Flakiness and Elongation Index, Specific Gravity & Water absorption, Aggregate Impact Value (AIV), Striping and Coating test and Los Angeles Abrasion Value (LAV)

x Lab Test: (Sand); Grain Size Analysis, Zoning of Sand, Sp. Gravity, Fitness Modulus & Sand Equivalent Test

0830 Preliminary Designs

0831 Traffic and Toll forecasting for 12,15, 20& 25 years

As per TOR, consultant shall provide estimated construction costs, OMC, traffic forecast, toll revenues etc. as part of preliminary financial analysis for alternative design period of 12, 15,20 & 25 years.

0832 Preliminary Pavement Design

Typical cross sections for different sections of the project are developed. Homogenous sections shall be based on traffic, soil type, axle loading spectrum and pavement condition survey in conjunction with BBD survey. Flexible pavement type is proposed for the project corridor except for Toll plaza location. Rigid pavement shall be provided in Toll Plaza locations. Flexible Pavement design shall be done using latest version of IRC:37, IRC:81, Two-laning manual guidelines. Rigid pavement design shall be done using IRC:58 guidelines.

0833 Widening / Improvement Proposals for Bridges and Culverts

27 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Based on bridge condition survey, options for retention of existing bridges and other structures or their replacement by new structures together with preliminary design will be provided.

0834 Preliminary drainage assessment

Consultant shall make preliminary drainage assessment of the entire project. Requirement for additional culverts/bridges shall be identified depending upon the hydrology of area.

0835 Preliminary layout of intersections, grade separators and intersections with ramps

Consultant shall make preliminary layout of intersections, grade separators and intersection with ramps based on the traffic and highway geometric alignment.

0840 Preliminary Costing

0841 Indicative BOQ

Consultant shall prepare the BOQ based on the preliminary design.

0842 Preliminary Cost Estimate for Construction of Project Highway

Consultant shall prepare the preliminary cost estimate for construction of project highway based on the preliminary design.

0843 Estimation of Total Project Cost

Consultant shall prepare the estimate of total project cost based on the preliminary design.

0850 Schedules of Contract Agreement

0851 Provide Schedules A,B,C,D,H and I of the CA

Consultant shall provide the schedules A,B,C,D,H and I of the CA.

0860 Financial Analysis

0861 Preliminary financial assessment of project (likely IRR for 12,15,20,25 years)

The consultant shall provide the estimated construction cost, operation and maintenance cost, traffic forecasts as part of preliminary financial analysis and appraisal of project. A preliminary assessment of the financial viability of the project with a view to estimating the likely IRR over a concession period of 10,15 ,20 and 25 years respectively.

0862 Estimate likely viability gap funding

Consultant shall submit a preliminary Inception report where it must clearly spell out the broad strategy for structuring the project in a manner that would restrict the likely viability gap funding to a level not exceeding 20 percent of the capital cost of the project assuming IRR of 12 percent.

0900 Final Feasibility Report

28 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Consultant shall provide the final feasibility report cum preliminary design based on the geometric alignment, structural proposals and pavement related improvement proposals.

0911Review PWD comments in context with codal provisions and site requirements

The consultant shall review PWD comments in context with the codal provisions and site requirements.

0912Comments to be complied in report and preliminary design

The comments from PWD based on the codal provisional and site requirements shall be complied in the report and preliminary design.

1000 Assistance during Bid Process

The consultant shall provide the required assistance to the financial consultant and legal advisor in preparation of bid documents. The consultant shall also participate in Pre-bid conferences and assist in preparation of reply to pre-bid queries on technical aspects of the project highway and bid documents.

CHAPTER 3

SOCIO- ECONOMIC PROFILE OF PROJECT INFLUENCE

3.1 Methodology Adopted for Environmental Impact Assessment The following steps are involved in EIA methodology: ƒ Assembly, Literature Survey and Analysis of Data Assembly, Literature Survey and Analysis of Data Published and other recorded data e.g. on wildlife, flora, climate, pollution etc. pertaining to the project were studied and reviewed. The TOR and MOEF guidelines were also reviewed prior to carry out EIA studies. ƒ Incorporation of Environmental considerations into the feasibility study

29 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Scoping process was used to determine the anticipated range of issues to be addressed and an in-depth study required for environmental analysis during project Design, Construction and Operational phases. Potential impacts due existing up-gradation of the road determined by conducting physical visit to the project site and environmental screening. The aim was to address adequately the potential impacts into the design so as to determine the best suited alignment. ƒ Reconnaissance Surveys Reconnaissance Surveys were undertaken by all members of the study teams initiating with a joint reconnaissance with the members of the PWD and those responsible for the documentation of the environmental investigations and issues. ƒ Preliminary Environmental Screening The objective behind the environmental screening was to delineate affected environmental features/issues e.g. waterways, forest areas, plantation/trees, cultural heritage, market places/human settlements, agricultural land, air, water, natural resources, noise etc. in the project area, in order to define impacts and to minimize the adverse environmental impacts by suggesting best engineering solutions/options at optimal costs and further to categorize and define the scope of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study to be conducted. ƒ Documentation of Baseline Conditions The area of influence of the project was defined considering MoEF requirements (EIA notification, 14th September 2006 and Amendment 2009) and other statutory requirements. Baseline conditions within the defined area were documented. As per MoEF guidelines for conducting EIA; the geographical scope of the EIA study will be of 10 km radius for highway projects. However realistically speaking, as the project relates to widening and improvement of existing road into 2-lane/2-lane with granular shoulder, the direct influence of the project is restricted to COI only. Therefore the baseline status has been documented at the COI level. However, major environmental features like wildlife sanctuary, national parks, eco-sensitive zone, and industrial areas were recorded within 10 km radius of the project road. ƒ Assessment of Potential Impacts Potential significant impacts were identified on the basis of analytical review of baseline data, land uses, environmental factors, socio-economic conditions and review of assessment of potential impacts identified in previous similar kind of projects. ƒ Integration of Environmental Assessments in the Design Process: The design and decision-making process, integrated environmental and resettlement and rehabilitation issues and prompted the early identification of appropriate actions. Such actions included, for example, shifts in alignments; based on awareness of the locations of cultural resources, and biological resources such as significant areas along the highway like trees, temples etc. to reduce local impacts. ƒ Assessment of Alternatives Alternatives were continuously assessed throughout the process. A more formal assessment was also undertaken as a part of the environmental assessment process including the assessment of the “No Action” Alternative as is customarily included as a part of the formal assessment methodologies to ensure that it has been given proper consideration. ƒ Identified Mitigation & Environmental Enhancement Measures

30 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Positive actions not only to avoid adverse impacts, but to capitalize on opportunities to correct environmental degradation or improve environmental conditions were determined. ƒ Community Consultations Consultations with concerned officials, agencies and potentially affected persons continued through the process and will continue as the project proceeds. The issues raised by the community and the various stakeholders were incorporated in the design and construction/operation plan of the project. ƒ Preparation of the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) An EMP will be prepared to specify the steps necessary to ensure that the necessary measures have been and will be taken. This includes the monitoring plan and gives details of the resources budgeted and the implementation arrangements. 3.2 Macro Level Baseline 3.2.1 Physical Environment ƒ Meteorology Regional meteorological conditions and the project corridor air basin is of high significance in road development projects because transportation and diffusion of all ambient air pollutants generated during project implementation and/or operational phase once they are air borne are governed by local meteorological conditions. The data is used for measuring the capacity for dispersion and diffusion of pollutants during the construction and operation stages of project. This data also plays a vital role in locating hot mix plants/ Batch Mix Plant to offset any impact on sensitive receptors. The meteorological data also helps in prediction using different models. ƒ Climate Rajasthan Climate comprises of three seasons. They are the summer months that spans from mid-April to the end of June. The rainy season in Rajasthan is from the months of early July to end of September. The winter season in Rajasthan is experienced during the months of early December to the end of February. The transitional Seasons in Rajasthan are the pre- monsoon, monsoon, post monsoon season and the winter season. Summer in Rajasthan actually commences from mid-April. But the temperature starts rising from February onwards. The summer months are followed by the rainy seasons. Generally, the rainy season in Rajasthan begins in the first weeks of July. It ranges from 250mm to 1000mm. The agriculture of the state highly depends on the rains. The monsoon is brought by the monsoonal winds blowing over the Bay of Bengal. The winter season in Rajasthan is mostly experienced in the month of January, when the temperature falls to 5°C in the night and it is around 12°C in the morning. The post monsoonal transitional season remains quite fair and dry. In the post winter transitional season, hail storms and brief showers occur which causes damage to the crops. During the end of the March, the wind becomes dry. The Rajasthan Climate has been a great factor in contributing to the economy of the state. Table 3.1: Average Temperature (In degree centigrade) Sl. Average Temperature District No. Maximum Minimum

1 Pali 45°C 0°C

31 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

2 Sirohi 42°C 0°C

Average annual rainfall data of the project district from the year 2007 to 2012 is presented hereunder, in Table 3.2. Table 3.2: Average Annual Rainfall (In Centimetres)

Sl. Annual Rainfall Year - Annual Rainfall Year - Name of District No. 2007 2012

1 Pali 24.2 23.9

2 Sirohi 59.11 47.34

3.2.2 Physical Setting The project highway traverses entirely through the plain terrain/rolling and passes through Pali and of Rajasthan. ƒ Topography The Rajasthan is the western part of India and shares a border with Pakistan along the Sutlej-Indus river valley. Elsewhere it is bordered by other Indian states: to the southwest; Madhya Pradesh to the southeast; Uttar Pradesh and Haryana to the northeast; and to the north.

The geographic features of Rajasthan are the Thar Desert and the , which runs through the state from southwest to northeast, almost from one end to the other, for more than 850 kilometres (530 mi). lies at the southwestern end of the range, separated from the main ranges by the West Banas River, although a series of broken ridges continues into Haryana in the direction of where it can be seen as outcrops in the form of the Raisina Hill and the ridges farther north. About three-fifths of Rajasthan lies northwest of the Aravallis, leaving two-fifths on the east and south direction. The northwestern portion of Rajasthan is generally sandy and dry. Most of this region is covered by the Thar Desert which extends into adjoining portions of Pakistan. The Aravalli Range does not intercept the moisture-giving southwest monsoon winds off the Arabian Sea, as it lies in a direction parallel to that of the coming monsoon winds, leaving the northwestern region in a rain shadow. The Thar Desert is thinly populated; the town of Bikaner is the largest city in the desert. The Northwestern thorn scrub forests lie in a band around the Thar Desert, between the desert and the Aravallis. This region receives less than 400 mm of rain in an average year. Temperatures can exceed 45 °C in the summer months and drop below freezing in the winter. The Godwar, Marwar, and Shekhawati regions lie in the thorn scrub forest zone, along with the city of Jodhpur. The Luni River and its tributaries are the major river system of Godwar and Marwar regions, draining the western slopes of the Aravallis and emptying southwest into the great Rann of Kutch wetland in neighbouring Gujarat. This river is saline in the lower reaches and remains potable only up to Balotara in . The Ghaggar River, which originates in Haryana, is an intermittent stream that disappears into the sands of the Thar Desert in the northern corner of the state and is seen as a remnant of the primitive Saraswati river. ƒ Geology, Rocks and Soil 32 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

The geology of the area, by and large, is underlain by the quaternary alluvium, comprising chiefly clays, sand of various grades, kankar and occasionally gravel and pebbles. It has been observed that the clayey material generally constitutes between 31 and 81 percent of the caustic sediments down to a maximum drilled depth of about 151 meters from the ground level. Granular material comprising chiefly fine to coarse grained sand with occasional pebbles appear to be ventricular in shape with their longer axes generally running in the north-south direction. The soil of the area is sandy to clay. In general, there is a deficiency of nitrogen and organic matter in the soils, but the phosphorus content ranges from low to medium. It is, therefore, evident that, for obtaining good yields, the soils need heavy manuring with nitrogenous and phosphatic fertilizers soils.

Fig 3.1: Geological & Mineral Map of Rajasthan

3.2.3 Water Resources The main hydrological features along the project roads are the rivers and irrigation canals. 3.2.4 Ecological Resources There is a Reserved forest of 2 km at Sumer. ƒ Environmentally Sensitive Zones/ Hot Spots No environmentally sensitive zones or a hot spot falls within the COI of the project. 3.2.5 Demographic, Social and Socio-Economic Profile The succeding paragraphs outlines the demographic, social and the socio economic profile of the state project districts. a) Population According to 2001 census the population of Rajasthan is 5,65,07,188 persons with a density of 165 persons per sq. km with 24.89 percent living in urban. The population data such as total population, decadal growth rates, density, sex ratio, literacy and percentage of urban population of project district according to 2001 census are given below in Table 3.3. 33 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 3.3: Area and Population of Project Area according to 2001 Census

Total Urban Sl. Name of Total Population Sex Literacy Geographical Population No. District Population Density Ratio Rate Area (Ha.) (%)

1 Rajasthan 34223900 565,07,188 165 928 67.07 24.89

2 Pali 1238700 20,37,573 165 987 62.39 17.68

3 Sirohi 517900 10,36,346 202 940 55.25 20.13

Source: Statistical Handbook of Rajasthan, 2001 b) Economic features Since the early nineties, the Government of India has initiated a number of reform measures

in various sectors to liberalize the economy and make it conducive to rapid growth. As a

result of liberalization, the economy is on the growth path reflected by a low inflation rate and

growing foreign exchange reserves, while most of the South East Asian countries had

suffered serious economic crises due to currency melt down in the late 1990’s. The state has

registered a healthy growth rate between 2003-04 and 2006-07.

3.3 Micro Level Baseline

3.3.1 Air Quality The air quality of the project highway is influenced by emissions from stationary sources like domestic sources from various settlements, stone crushers operating along the roadsides and from mobile sources like the vehicles plying along the road. All these sources contribute to the local air pollution levels. Respirable dust samplers/high volume samplers of Envirotech Instruments were used for

monitoring PM10 and PM2.5, CO, SO2, and NOx. M/s. Sishodia-Research Laboratories Pvt. Ltd, Lucknow were contracted, which is an approved Laboratory by Ministry of Environment and Forests, and GOI for collection and analysis of air samples.

In order to establish the baseline air pollution status, ambient air quality was monitored at the various locations along the project road. Table 3.4 provides air quality monitoring results with respect to each location where air quality has been monitored. These air quality monitoring stations were selected depending on the factors like land use so that samples are true representatives of the project site. The samples were

analysed for pollutants of interest (CO, NOx, SO2, PM10 and PM2.5) using the appropriate method prescribed by Bureau of Indian Standards and Central Pollution Control Board. Table 3.4: Ambient Air Quality in the Project Area (Monitored during 10.12.2014)

34 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Para Sl. Prescribe mete Unit Siyat Jorkiya Bhatund Protocol No. d Limits rs

IS: 5182 (Part A01 PM µg/m3 129 118 128 100 10 23), 2006

CPCB A02 PM µg/m3 38 35 37 60 2.5 Guidelines

IS: 5182 Part-II, A03 SO µg/m3 21 19 22 80 2 2001

IS: 5182 Part- A04 NO µg/m3 24 21 25 80 x VI, 2007

IS: 5182 Part- A05 CO µg/m3 961 847 944 2000 10

The results of analysis of air samples are presented in the following tables. In general for 3 all monitoring stations the PM10 values were monitored in the range 118 - 129 µg/m . While comparing with the National Ambient Air Quality (NAAQ) Standard of 100 by the

Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), all the monitored PM10 values were found to be near the limit (slightly higher). This is because of high vehicular location and dryness of

the areas. PM2.5 values were ranging from 35-38. While comparing with the NAAQ Standard of 60 the monitored PM2.5 values were found well within the prescribed limit. Similarly monitored values for SO, NO and CO is also found within the limit. ƒ National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) The permissible air quality standards for particulate and gaseous pollutants are presented in Table 3.5 as laid down by the CPCB. Table 3.5: National Ambient Air Quality Standards Concentration in Ambient Air

Time Industrial, Sl. Ecologically Polluants Residential No. Weighted Sensitive Area , Rural and Average (Notified by Central Other Government ** Areas

Annual Average* 50 20 Sulphur Dioxide 1 (SO2) 24 hours ** 80 80

Annual Average* 40 30 Nitrogen Dioxide 2 (NO ) 2 24 hours ** 80 80

Particulate Matter Annual Average* 40 40 3 (<2.5 Pm) or PM2.5 24 hours ** 60 60

4 Particulate Matter Annual Average* 60 60

35 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Concentration in Ambient Air

Time Industrial, Sl. Ecologically Polluants Residential No. Weighted Sensitive Area , Rural and Average (Notified by Central Other Government ** Areas

(<10 Pm) or PM10 24 hours ** 100 100

8 hours ** 100 100 5 Ozone (O 3) 1 hours ** 180 180

Annual Average* 0.50 0.50 6 Lead (Pb) 24 hours ** 1.0 1.0

Carbon Monoxide 8 hours ** 02 02 7 3 (CO) (mg/m ) 1 hours ** 04 04

Annual Average * 100 100 8 Ammonia (NH3) 24 hours ** 400 400

9 Benzene (C6H6) Annual Average* 05 05

Benzo Pyrene 10 (BaP) particulate Annual Average* 01 01 phase

11 Arsenic (AS) Annual Average* 06 06

12 Nikel (Ni) Annual Average* 20 20

Legend: *: Annual arithmetic mean of minimum 104 measurements in a year taken twice a week, 24 hourly at uniform interval.

**: 24 hourly / 8 hourly values which should be met 98% of the time in a year (on 2% of the time, it may be exceeded for less than two consecutive days). Source: Central Pollution Control Board (2009), Gazette Notification November 18th, 2009. 3.3.2 Noise Level The local people inhabiting the settlements nearby and the road users are susceptible to noise generated by the flowing traffic. The existing noise environment has been monitored at 3 locations. The sites have been selected in consultation with M/s. Sishodia- Research Laboratories Pvt. Ltd, Lucknow, keeping the site conditions in mind. The noise measurement has been carried out continuously for a period of 24 hours. At each site 2880 data were recorded, each taken at an interval of 30 seconds of which 1800 data recorded at day time (07:00 AM to 10:00 PM) and 1080 at night time (10:00

36 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

PM – 07:00 AM). The noises level monitored are given in Table 3.6. Ambient Noise Quality standards are Presented Table 3.6.

Table 3.6: Equivalent Noise Level Data

Sl. Place Date of Leq dB Leq dB No. Monitoring (A) Day (A) Night

1 Siyat 10.12.2014 62.1 51.3

2 Jorkiya 10.12.2014 54.2 42.5

3 Bhatund 10.12.2014 52.4 41.4

The monitored noise levels were ranging from 41.4dB(A) to 62.1dB(A), while comparing the MoEF Ambient Noise Norms for different categories, Leq noise levels at all locations during day and night time were found to be exceeding their respective limits. This is because of regular movement of diverse vehicles. It may be noted that as the noise survey was carried out at sensitive receptors i.e. School Zone and Hospital Zone respectively, noise standards is found above the limits at both locations. Table 3.7: Ambient Noise Quality Standards Noise dB(A) Leq Area Code Category of Area Daytime* Night time* A Industrial Area 75 70 B Commercial Area 65 55 C Residential Area 55 45 D Silence Zone 50 40

Note: 1. Day time shall be reckoned from 6.00 a.m. and 10.00 p.m. 2. Night time shall be reckoned from 10.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. 3. Silence zone is defined as an area comprising not less than 100 metres around hospitals, educational institutions and courts. The silence zones are zones which are declared as such by the competent authority. 4. Mixed categories of areas may be declared as one of the four above mentioned categories by the competent authority. *dB(A) Leq denotes the time weighted average of the level of sound in decibels on scale A which is relatable to human hearing. A "decibel" is a unit in which noise is measured. "A", in dB (A) Leq, denotes the frequency weighting in the measurement of noise and corresponds to frequency response characteristics of the human ear. Leq: It is energy mean of the noise level, over a specified period. 3.3.3 Water Resources and Quality The inventory of water resources and their quality is required to be monitored to establish the baseline status. This helps in identification of mitigation measures as well as future monitoring to check possible contamination of such resources.

37 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

The main hydrological features along the Project Highway comprise of irrigation canals, drains and ponds. Project Highway irrigation canals, ponds and few drains at different locations where structures are proposed. The locations and name of surface water bodies, Tube wells/Wells/Bore wells, ponds, canal crossings etc.

Table 3.8: Groundwater Quality Monitoring Results

Sl. Units of Desirabl N Parameter Measuremen Siyat Jorkiya Bhatund Protocol e Limits o ts

Colour Hazen Units <5 <5 <5 5 IS: 3025 1. Turbidity NTU <1 <1 <1 5 IS: 3025 2. pH - 7.09 7.34 7.05 6.5-8.5 IS: 3025 3. Temperature °C 24 23 25 - IS : 3025 4. Dissolved mg/l 4.1 4.3 4.5 6 IS : 3025 5. Oxygen

Conductivity µmhos/cm 972 1004 1049 - IS : 3025 6. Total Suspended mg/l <3 <5 <4 - IS : 3025 7. Solids

Total Dissolved mg/l 642 682 670 500 IS : 3025 8. Solids

Alkalinity as mg/l 404 410 432 200 IS : 3025 9. CaCO3

Total Hardness mg/l 336 340 347 300 IS : 3025 10. as CaCO3

Calcium as mg/l 174 184 190 75 IS : 3025 11. CaCO3

Magnesium as mg/l 166 177 174 30 IS : 3025 12. CaCO3

Sodium as Na mg/l 58 62 65 - APHA 13. Potassium as K mg/l 16 18 15 - APHA 14. Chloride as Cl mg/l 24 26 25 250 IS : 3025 15. Phosphate as mg/l 0.05 0.03 0.04 - IS : 3025 16. PO4

Sulphate as SO mg/l 68 64 72 200 IS : 3025 17. 4

38 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Sl. Units of Desirabl N Parameter Measuremen Siyat Jorkiya Bhatund Protocol e Limits o ts

Nitrate as NO mg/l 0.18 0.24 0.36 45 IS : 3025 18. 3 Oil & Grease mg/l Nil Nil Nil - IS : 3025 19. Phenolic mg/l <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 IS : 3025 20. Compounds

Chemical Oxygen mg/l <1 <3 <2 - IS : 3025 21. Demand

Biological Oxygen mg/l <3 <1 <2 - IS : 3025 22. Demand

Arsenic as As mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 IS : 3025 23. Mercury as Hg mg/l <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 IS : 3025 24. Lead as Pb mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 IS : 3025 25. Cadmium as Cd mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.003 IS : 3025 26. Chromium as mg/l <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 IS : 3025 27. Cr+6

Copper as Cu mg/l <0.01 <0.02 <0.01 0.05 IS : 3025 28. Zinc as Zn mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 5 IS : 3025 29. Selenium as Se mg/l <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.01 IS : 3025 30. Iron as Fe mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.3 IS : 3025 31. IS : 5401 - Total Coliform MPN/l00ml ND ND ND - 32. (Part-II)

IS : 5401 - Faecal Coliform MPN/l00ml ND ND ND - 33. (Part-II)

ND = Not Detectable As depicted in the table above, the ground water quality was found within the permissible standards. 3.3.4 Soil Quality The soil of the area is sandy to clay. In general, there is a deficiency of nitrogen and organic matter in the soils, but the phosphorus content ranges from low to medium. It is, therefore, evident that, for obtaining good yields, the soils need heavy manuring with nitrogenous and phosphatic fertilizers soils.

39 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

3.3.5 Ecological Resources ƒ Flora The flora of the project region and its surrounding is not very rich in density. The succeeding paragraphs describe the ecological setting of the project site. ƒ Reserve Forest The 2 km section of the project road from km 114+200 to km 116+200 passes

through “Sumer Reserved Forest”.

ƒ Trees / Vegetation within corridor of impact The project highway is passing through the cultivated land and built-up areas. Some of the tress will be affected by the proposed project. However, through compensatory afforestation @ 1:3 will again improve the greenery of the area. Additional plantation along the road will enhance the aesthetic beauty of the area. Some of the predominant species of flora found along the roadside are presented in Table 3.9.

Table 3.9: List of predominant species of flora along the project road Associate Species Main Species Prosopis Cineraria Syzygium Cumini Calotropis Precera Bacopa monnieri Cassia Aureculata Acacia nilotica Sizypus Nummularia Butea monosperma Phoenix Sylvestris Adathoda Vassica Anogeisrus Pendula Asparagus About 20566 numbers of trees are recorded in the proposed RoW of project highway. Abstract of tree inventory is presented in Table 3.10. Table 3.10: Abstract of Tree inventory along project road

Sr. Girth Size Details of Trees (in Nos) Category No (cm) Pali Sirohi

1 30-60 G1 3292 2885

2 60-90 G2 2726 2468

3 90-120 G3 1970 1962

4 120-150 G4 1222 1048

5 150-180 G5 992 740

6 180> G6 672 589

Total of affected trees 10874 9692

40 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

ƒ Fauna Conservation oriented legal proviso were made in the erstwhile Acts regulating

hunting of game birds and wild animals. In tune with the national consciousness

towards conservation of flora and fauna the state government began setting up a

network of in-situ conservation areas (national parks and sanctuaries) under the

provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. The 2 km section of the project road

from km 114+200 to km 116+200 passes through “Summer Reserved Forest”.

3.4 Availability of Construction Material The objectives of preliminary material investigation are as follows: ƒ Finalising borrows area locations for suitable soils for use in embankment and sub- grade and sources for fly ash. ƒ Identify suitable sources for granular sub-base material like moorum/stone. ƒ Identify suitable quarries from stone aggregates for concrete and bituminous works. ƒ Identify suitable sources for sand. ƒ Source of water for construction. ƒ Identify sources of other construction materials like cement, steel and bitumen. 3.4.1 Embankment/ Sub-Grade The surveys of soil from borrow area for use in embankment and sub-grade was conducted all along the project road. There many borrow areas identified all along the project road to the borrow areas listed in the earlier reports. 1.1.1 Soils samples are collected from these borrow areas to check the suitability for construction of embankment / sub grade. As per mandatory instruction of G.O.I, use of fly ash in construction of embankment is essential when the haulage distance is less than 100 km. Thermal Power plant at Kota situated at 310 kilometers approximately and Thermal Power plant at Thumbil situated at 274 Km approximately from our Project road which is good source for fly ash. 3.4.2 Granular Sub-base Granular sub-base will be constructed with natural gravel / graded stones mixed with fine materials. Gravel is available at various locations along the project road. The location, type of gravel, available quantity and approximate distance from the project road. Alternatively GSB may be constructed with crushed graded stones available at stone quarries. 3.4.3 Stone Aggregates Extensive survey has been carried out to identify the suitable stone quarry nearer to the project road. There are good quality granite stone quarries are available around project road. 3.4.4 Sand Currently in Rajasthan, there are more than 650 sand and gravel mining sites. 3.4.5 Cement, Steel and Bitumen Cement and Steel are available from local authorised agents in bulk with average lead of 15–25km. Bitumen is available from refinery. 41 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

3.4.6 Social Environment ƒ Archaeological and Cultural Properties Archaeological and cultural properties mostly comprise of the religious structures along the Corridor of Impact. There is no protected archaeological property or monument exists along the project highway. ƒ Settlements and Properties Some villages locate along the project highway those are directly affected by the improvement of this project development. ƒ Land Use Pattern Maximum portion of Project highway passes through a rural agricultural setting followed by plain/flat terrain. The land use pattern of the project area consists of agricultural, commercial and built-up/residential. Paddy, wheat, sunflower, sugarcane are the dominant crops of the area. Other crops sown in the area are Barley, moong, mustard, etc. In project area more than 80% of the area is under cultivated area. 3.5 Project Affected People (PAPs) a) Socio-economic Profile of the PAPs ƒ Workforce Participation in the Project Area Based on the final technical designs, a socio-economic and census survey was conducted within the proposed corridor. The census survey identified, affected families and the economic activities carried out by them. Table 3.11 presents the type of families and number of persons affected. Out of the total 398 families affected, about 28.4% are residential and 44.5% are from commercial. Data regarding agricultural PAFs will be finalized after 3D notification. Table 3.11: Distribution of Entitled PAFs Project Affected Families Project Affected Persons Category (PAFs) (PAPs)

Residential 113 (28.4%) 767 (18.9%)

Commercial 177 (44.5%) 2234 (55.1%)

R & C 108 (27.1%) 1057 (26.0%)

All 398 (100.0%) 4058 (100.0%)

Source: Baseline Socio Economic/ Census Survey, 2014 Among the PAFs, 96 (about 24.1%) families are joint, 185 (46.5%) are nuclear families and 117 (29.4%) are individuals (Table 2.3). Nuclear families are considered to be an indication of the socio-economic development and growth of the project area.

Table 3.12: PAFs by Type of Families Categories of PAFs Joint Nuclear Individual Total (Nos.)

Residential 29 50 33 112

Commercial 43 80 55 178

R&C 24 55 29 108

42 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Categories of PAFs Joint Nuclear Individual Total (Nos.)

Total 96 185 117 398

In % 24.1 46.5 29.4 100.0

Source: Baseline Socio Economic/ Census Survey, 2014

CHAPTER 4 TRAFFIC SURVEY, ANALYSIS & FORECAST

4.1 TRAFFIC SURVEY METHODOLOGY

To comprehensively appreciate the traffic and travel characteristics on the project corridor from Sojat to Pindwara, the type of surveys, locations and duration, as identified at the inception stage of the study have been followed during data collection exercise with minor modifications on account of site conditions. As per the geometrical conditions of the road and varying flow characteristics on the project corridor, the road has been segmented in to seven sections, keeping in view the homogeneity of the traffic, as given below:

x Homogenous Section-1: (HS-1) Starting from Roundabout Junction with NH-62 (Beawar-Pali-Pindwara road) at Km 35 of SH-62 in Sojat City and ending in at Km 45 of SH-62. The length of the homogenous section is 10Km. x Homogenous Section-2: (HS-2) Starting from Km 45 of SH-62 in Sojat Road and ending at a Y-Junction in Jojawar at Km 88 of SH-62. The length of the homogenous section is 43Km.

43 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

x Homogenous Section-3: (HS-3) Starting from Y-Junction in Jojawar at Km 88 of SH-62 and ending at Km 109 of SH-62 near Bagol. The length of the homogenous section is 22Km. x Homogenous Section-4: (HS-4) Starting from Km 109 of SH-62 near Bagol and ending at Y-Junction with SH-67 at Km 123 of SH-62 in Desuri. The length of the homogenous section is 14Km. x Homogenous Section-5: (HS-5) Starting from T-Junction in Sadri at Km 139 of SH-62 and ending at Km 162 of SH-62 near Sewari. The length of the homogenous section is 23Km. x Homogenous Section-6: (HS-6) Starting from Km 162 of SH-62 near Sewari and ending at Km 192 of SH-62 near Nana. The length of the homogenous section is 30Km. x Homogenous Section-7: (HS-7) Starting from Km 192 of SH-62 near Nana and ending at T-Junction with NH-62 in Pindwara at Km 212 of SH-62. The length of the homogenous section is 20Km.

The segment of 16 Km from Km 123 to Km 139 of SH-62 is excluded from the scope of the current study, as the segment coincides with SH-16.

A detailed reconnaissance survey was conducted to identify any possible alternate routes where the traffic could divert to/from the project road after upgradation of project road. As a result of that, the Consultant has following observations:

x NH-62, also known as Beawar-Pali-Pindwara road, runs parallel to the project road, and touches the project road at both the extremes viz. Sojat in the North at Km 35 of SH-62 and Pindwara in the South at Km 212 of SH-62. NH-62 is a recently upgraded road on BOT basis, and would attract regional traffic from NH- 8, which runs across the state of Rajasthan from Punjab and Haryana to Gujarat and Maharashtra in South. A substantial traffic is expected to divert on the project road from NH-62. The quantum of diversion is assessed on the basis of Diversion Equations developed through exhaustive studies done by CRRI (Central Road Research Institute, New Delhi) and ADB (Asian Development Bank), which has been summarized in IRC:SP:30: Manual for Evaluation of Economic Evaluation of highway Projects (2009). x SH-67 connecting Desuri to Pali is another corridor, which runs across the project road, and would contribute to the diversion of traffic on Project road, due to reduction in travel distance between Desuri, Sojat and through the newly constructed facility.

Keeping in view the above traffic movement and for the assessment of the traffic conditions, the traffic survey plan was scheduled as given below in Table 4.1. Traffic

44 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Census was conducted twice in order to assess the magnitude of the traffic on the project road precisely and free from any variation of traffic due to sampling and site influences.

Table 4.1: Traffic Survey Schedule

Sl. Type of Location Date(s) of Survey-I Date(s) of Survey-II No. Survey 1 HS:1 - Km 45 near Siyat 8.09.2014 - 14.09.2014 29.04.2015 - 05.05.2015 2 HS:2 - Km 65 near Vopari 16.09.2014 - 18.09.2014 29.04.2015 - 05.05.2015 Classified 3 HS:3 – Km 95 near Jorkiya 08.09.2014 - 14.09.2014 02.05.2015 - 08.05.2015 Volume 4 HS:4 – Km 117 near Sumer 17.09.2014 - 19.09.2014 28.04.2015 - 04.05.2015 Count 5 HS:5 – Km 159 near Lunawa 8.09.2014 - 14.09.2014 28.04.2015 - 04.05.2015 Surveys 6 HS:6 – Km 173 near Bhatund 8.09.2014 – 14.09.2014 29.04.2015 - 05.05.2015 7 HS:7 – Km 201 near Amli 8.09.2014 – 14.09.2014 02.05.2015 – 8.05.2015 8 HS:1 - Km 45 near Siyat 10.09.2014 9 HS:2 - Km 65 near Vopari 17.09.2014 10 Origin HS:3 – Km 95 near Jorkiya 11.09.2014 11 Destination HS:4 – Km 117 near Sumer 19.0.2014 12 Surveys HS:5 – Km 159 near Lunawa 12.09.2014 13 HS:6 – Km 173 near Bhatund 18.09.2014 14 HS:7 – Km 201 near Amli 17.09.2014 15 Axle Load Km 40 near Siyat 10.09.2014 16 survey Km 159 near Lunawa 12.09.2014

The entire project road falls under Pali and Sirohi District. The location map of the project road along with traffic survey location is shown below in Figure 4.1.

45 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Figure 4-1: Traffic Survey location Map 4.1.1 Classified Traffic Volume Counts

At the draft feasibility stage, Traffic volume count was conducted for each identified homogenous sections for continuous consecutive days. The survey data was collected on a pre-designed preformat of 15 minute intervals as per IRC-9 (1972): Traffic Census for Non-Urban Roads (First Revision), though separate traffic volume count sheets have been utilized for goods and passenger surveys in order to get a better analysis of different typology of vehicles over the project corridors. Survey location was selected so as to capture representative traffic volume on the homogeneous section and not to capture local traffic nearby the urban settlements. Photos below show the survey under progress.

46 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

PHOTO 1: Traffic Survey under Progress 4.1.2 Origin-Destination Survey

To understand the desire pattern of traffic, the Origin-Destination Survey was conducted near 7 day Traffic volume count stations on the project corridor for 24 hours continuously, in a manner so as to coincide with the representative traffic volume counts. The road-side direct interview method was adopted to collect the survey data on a pre-designed preformat as per IRC-SP: 19 (2001): Manual for Survey, Investigation and Preparation of Road Projects. The survey sample was captured uniformly following a systematic random approach for all modes, with due care to avoid duplication of samples and undue weightage to any particular mode. Photos below show survey under progress.

PHOTO 2: OD Survey under Progress 4.1.3 Turning Movement Survey

Turning Movement Surveys were conducted at the major intersection of the project corridor with State Highways and Major District Roads for 12 hours covering all movement combinations. It was done to ascertain the need for intersection improvement based on the existing turning behaviour at the intersection. Since intersections are the points of accidents, so it is important to identify the vulnerability of the intersection and carry out improvement proposals based on existing condition.

4.1.4 Axle Load survey

At the selected survey location, arrangements were made for the installation of weighing pads by placing them at the edge on the uniform and level pavement surface available.

47 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

The portable and pre-calibrated wheel-weighing pad shall be used for the measurement of wheel load. The size of the weighing unit was constrained to one single or dual tyre assembly only, which was to be weighed one at a time. Each vehicle to be weighed was aligned so that both the front axle and rear axle wheels on one (outer) side of the vehicle were in line with the weighing unit. The vehicle was driven slowly onto the unit and stationed with the wheel being weighed at the centre of the top plate of the weighing pad. The vehicle was stopped long enough for the reading on the display unit to stabilize. The same procedure is repeated with the next axle.

Assuming that the load on each axle is evenly distributed, the axle load is taken to be twice the wheel load. Axle loads are weighed for all the fast commercial modes (LCV, 2- Axle Trucks, 3 Axle Trucks (3-AT), Multi-Axle Trucks (MAT) and Buses) on a sample basis, on an average day for 24 hours. While the vehicles were being weighed, information about the axle-type was also recorded. Simultaneously volume counts of modes weighed were also conducted. The sample size for different vehicle types across different locations was collected as per required sample basis including 25% empty vehicles.

PHOTO 3: Axle Load Survey under Progress

Trained enumerators were engaged for counting traffic under the supervision of experienced transport planners. The survey formats utilized for traffic study are given in Annexure 1.

The vehicles have been classified in the same manner as generally adopted in traffic studies carried by NHAI, along with their PCU values, as suggested in IRC: 64: Guidelines for Capacity of Roads in Rural Areas (1990) are presented in Table 4.2. In addition to the above categories, the counting of toll exempted vehicles, which include government vehicles, ambulances, fire vehicles, army vehicles etc. was carried out separately to estimate their composition. The counting of vehicles was done at 15 minute intervals in each direction continuously for 7 days.

Table 4.1.4.2: Vehicle Classification and PCU Values

Vehicle Type PCU factor

48 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Vehicle Type PCU factor Two Wheeler 0.5 Three Wheeler (Auto Rickshaw) 1.0 Car, Jeep and Van 1.0 Mini LCV 1.0 Mini Bus 1.5 Buses 3.0 Light Commercial Vehicle (LCV) 1.5 2-Axle truck 3.0 3-Axle Truck 3.0 Multi Axle Vehicle (MAV) 4.5 Agriculture Tractor 1.5 Agriculture Tractor with Trailer 4.5 Cycle 0.5 Cycle-Rickshaw 2.0 Animal Drawn Cart 6.0

4.2 TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS

The analysis of the classified traffic volume counts observed at the survey locations was carried out to arrive at the following:

x Average Daily Traffic (ADT) x Day-wise Variation & Hourly Variation x Directional Distribution x Vehicle Composition x Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)

4.2.1 Average Daily Traffic (ADT)

The traffic volume data collected for seven days was averaged out to arrive at average daily traffic (ADT) on the project road corridor and surrounding network. The summary of ADT in terms of vehicles and PCU for the respective survey location during first and second traffic survey is presented in Table 4.3 (i) and (ii).

The average daily traffic observed at during first traffic census for different locations signifies maximum traffic movement in first Homogenous Section (HS-1) from Sojat City to Sojat Road with an ADT of 4347 vehicles (3957 PCUs); of this only 1427 vehicles (2411 PCUs) are tollable. The minimum traffic was observed in HS-4 and HS-3 consecutively with 1196 vehicles (869 PCUs) and 1236 vehicles (942 PCUs) respectively. Notably, the homogenous section from Jojawar to Desuri experiences minimum traffic and thus tollable vehicles are also as low as 288 vehicles (401 PCUs) and 275 vehicles (391 PCUs) in HS-4 and HS-3 respectively. The traffic in the HS-5, HS- 6 and HS-7, i.e. from Sadri to Pindwara is more or less same.

49 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

The traffic pattern observed during the second traffic survey was found similar to that during the first traffic census with maximum traffic being observed in HS-1. But there is a slight increase observed in the tollable traffic during the second census at all the survey stations as compared during the first traffic survey. The variation can attributed to the following possible reasons:

1. First traffic survey was conducted in the month of September, during which the region observed rainfall. Also there are large number of causeways along the project road which makes the commute vulnerable for the road user and thus the traffic was low during the first census. 2. During the first traffic survey, the alternate corridor NH-62 (Beawar - Pali - Pindwara road) was widened to four lane divided carriageway facility without toll operations being functional during the survey period. Unlike the first traffic survey, the toll was functional on NH-62 during the second traffic census and this might have influence traffic routing behaviour of the area.

50 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.3 (i): Average Daily Traffic (ADT) during first Traffic Census

ADT (First Traffic Census) Categories HS-1@Km 40 HS-2 @Km 65 HS-3@Km 95 HS-4@Km 117 HS-5@Km 159 HS-6@Km 174 HS-7@Km 201 Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU 2 Wheeler 2,724 1,362 1,085 543 793 397 877 439 1,562 781 1,326 663 1,271 636 3 Wheeler 160 160 8 8 124 124 12 12 57 57 77 77 249 249 Car/Jeep/Van 638 638 143 143 116 116 132 132 279 279 151 151 91 91 Taxi 117 117 58 58 68 68 67 67 122 122 107 107 184 184 Mini LCV 166 166 72 72 36 36 35 35 36 36 78 78 29 29 Mini Bus 17 26 1 2 1 2 1 2 42 63 34 51 5 8 Private Bus 111 333 68 204 22 66 37 111 40 120 9 27 10 30 Govt. Bus 8 24 4 12 0 0 0 0 12 36 6 18 6 18 LCV 66 99 4 6 4 6 4 6 9 14 13 20 6 9 2-Axle 117 351 35 105 5 15 3 9 9 27 27 81 12 36 3-Axle 123 369 93 279 14 42 1 3 4 12 34 102 99 297 MAV (4-6) 23 104 8 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 1 5 OSV(More than 6) 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 HCM/EME Agricultural Tractor 3 5 22 33 7 11 7 11 13 20 66 99 0 0 Tractor-Trailer 40 180 14 63 9 41 8 36 20 90 32 144 22 99 Ex. Car/Jeep 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Bus 3 5 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 3 0 0 Ex. LCV Ex. Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bi-Cycle 29 15 29 15 36 18 9 5 146 73 108 54 24 12 Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 0 2 4 1 2 0 0 Animal Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 16 0 0 0 0 Slow Moving Traffic 29 15 30 17 37 20 9 5 150 93 109 56 24 12 Toll Exempted Traffic 2,891 1,532 1,116 585 924 531 899 464 1,633 859 1,471 842 1,520 885 Tollable Traffic 1,427 2,411 500 980 275 391 288 401 573 799 493 788 465 805 Total Traffic 4,347 3,957 1,646 1,581 1,236 942 1,196 869 2,356 1,751 2,073 1,686 2,009 1,702

51 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.3 (ii): Average Daily Traffic (ADT) during Second Traffic Census

ADT (Second Traffic Census) Categories HS-1@Km 40 HS-2 @Km 65 HS-3@Km 95 HS-4@Km 117 HS-5@Km 159 HS-6@Km 174 HS-7@Km 201 Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU 2 Wheeler 2,416 1,208 2,415 1,207 1,168 584 1,789 895 2,745 1,373 641 321 1,703 851 3 Wheeler 164 164 70 70 145 145 49 49 128 128 48 48 251 251 Car/Jeep/Van 1,426 1,426 310 310 255 255 445 445 629 629 285 285 227 227 Taxi 54 54 133 133 120 120 233 233 146 146 63 63 158 158 Mini LCV 130 130 108 108 61 61 100 100 71 71 37 37 44 44 Mini Bus 9 13 16 24 5 7 2 4 34 51 19 28 8 12 Private Bus 117 350 113 339 24 73 57 171 95 286 7 22 17 51 Govt. Bus 14 41 5 15 8 25 0 0 8 25 5 15 14 41 LCV 82 124 22 34 17 25 7 10 25 38 10 15 17 26 2-Axle 96 288 45 135 12 36 6 17 19 57 22 65 24 71 3-Axle 68 203 84 253 18 55 2 7 15 44 23 70 129 387 MAV (4-6) 20 90 14 65 3 15 1 6 3 15 5 21 10 44 OSV(More than 6) 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 HCM/EME Agricultural Tractor 20 31 25 38 16 24 5 8 30 45 30 44 14 20 Tractor-Trailer 6 26 43 192 20 91 8 36 55 248 17 77 33 150 Ex. Car/Jeep 3 3 9 9 2 2 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 Ex. Bus 6 9 0 1 0 0 3 4 2 4 0 0 1 2 Ex. LCV Ex. Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 0 0 0 0 Bi-Cycle 14 7 24 12 24 12 10 5 160 80 57 29 35 18 Cycle-Rickshaw 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 Animal Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 0 0 0 0 Slow Moving Traffic 15 9 24 12 25 13 10 5 162 89 57 29 35 18 Toll Exempted Traffic 2,610 1,415 2,520 1,325 1,331 755 1,851 961 2,910 1,557 722 416 1,972 1,128 Tollable Traffic 2,021 2,745 893 1,606 544 768 861 1,028 1,100 1,608 492 696 681 1,213 Total Traffic 4,646 4,168 3,436 2,943 1,900 1,536 2,722 1,994 4,172 3,255 1,271 1,140 2,687 2,358

52 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.2.2 Day wise Variation

The day wise variation of total traffic at all the seven survey locations, in terms of vehicles and PCUs is shown in Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2: Day wise Variation of Total Traffic on the Project Road

First Traffic Survey Second Traffic Survey

53 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

54 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

The phenomenon of traffic variation on daily basis is not rational; however, such variation is peculiar on low volume roads, which is clearly the case of project road (SH-62), as the commuters take this route randomly. In case of HS-7 (Nana – Pindwara section), the traffic seems to increase linearly from Tuesday to Monday. This is attributed to the fact that, the location is near to Binani Cement Factory and Pindwara, where commercial shops remain closed on Tuesday, and Cement Truck generally start journey to their destinations on Monday.

4.2.3 Peak Hour Factor (PHF)

The hourly variation of traffic illustrates the distribution of traffic over the day with respect to time, and the peak hour factor is the maximum percentage of the total traffic that uses the project highway in one single hour of the day. It is of significance as highway capacities and design calculations are based on PHF. The peak hour factors observed at the survey locations are summarized in Table 4.4.

Table 4.4(i): Observed Peak Hour Traffic Characteristics (Survey-I)

Peak Hour ADT Sl. No. Survey Location PHF (%) Peak Hour Volume (PCU) (PCU) 1 Km 40.000 315 3957 8.0 15.00 - 16.00 2 Km65.000 127 1581 8.0 18.00 - 19.00 3 Km95.000 99 942 10.5 17.00 - 18.00 4 Km 117.000 76 869 8.7 11.00-12.00 5 Km 159.000 160 1751 9.1 18.00-19.00 6 Km 174.000 155 1686 9.2 9.00-10.00 7 Km 201.000 123 1702 7.2 14.00-15.00

Table 4.4(i): Observed Peak Hour Traffic Characteristics (Survey-II)

Peak Hour ADT Sl. No. Survey Location PHF (%) Peak Hour Volume (PCU) (PCU) 1 Km 40.000 291 4168 7.0 15.00 - 16.00 2 Km65.000 183 2943 6.2 08.00 - 09.00 3 Km95.000 116 1536 7.6 09.00 - 10.00 4 Km 117.000 157 1994 7.9 18.00-19.00 5 Km 159.000 234 3255 7.2 18.00-19.00 6 Km 174.000 94 1140 8.3 10.00-11.00 7 Km 201.000 171 2358 7.3 10.00-11.00

55 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.2.4 Hourly Variation of traffic

The hourly variation of (vehicle-nos.) observed at the traffic survey locations are shown below in Figure 4.3.

56 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

57 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Figure 4.3: Hourly Variation of Traffic on Project Road

4.2.5 Directional Distribution of Traffic

The directional distribution analysis, as reported in Table 4.5 below, indicates traffic directional distribution at all seven survey locations, there is an almost equal distribution in both directions of travel.

58 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.5(i): Directional distribution (in PCU) at toll plazas (%) (Survey-I)

Survey Distribution Direction Distribution of PCUs Location of Vehicles Project Road (SH-62) Sojat City to Sojat Road 50.1 50.6 Km 40.000 Sojat Road to Sojat City 49.9 49.4 Sojat Road to Jojawar 50.4 51.2 Km 65.000 Jojawar to Sojat Road 49.6 48.8 Jojawar to Bagol 52.6 53.2 Km 95.000 Bagol to Jojawar 47.4 46.8 Bagol to Desuri 52.0 52.0 Km 117.000 Desuri to Bagol 48.0 48.0 Sadri to Sewari 50.7 51.5 Km 159.000 Sewari to Sadri 49.3 48.5 Sewari to Nana 50.7 50.2 Km 174.000 Nana to Sewari 49.3 49.8 Km 201.000 Nana to Pindwara 50.1 50.8 Pindwara to Nana 49.9 49.2

Table 4.5(ii): Directional distribution (in PCU) at toll plazas (%) (Survey-II)

Survey Distribution Direction Distribution of PCUs Location of Vehicles Project Road (SH-62) Sojat City to Desuri 46.5 46.8 Km 40.000 Desuri to Sojat City 53.5 53.2 Sojat Road to Desuri 52.9 51.0 Km 65.000 Desuri to Sojat City 47.1 49.0 Sojat Road to Pindwara 49.1 49.5 Km 95.000 Pindwara to Sojat Road 50.1 50.5 Sojat City to Desuri 47.9 47.8 Km 117.000 Desuri to Sojat City 52.1 52.2 Sadri to Pindwara 49.2 48.9 Km 159.000 Pindwara to Sadri 50.8 51.1 Sojat Road to Pindwara 49.2 50.1 Km 174.000 Pindwara to Sojat Road 50.8 49.9 Sojat Road to Pindwara 50.1 51.1 Km 201.000 Pindwara to Sojat Road 49.9 48.9

59 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.2.6 Vehicle Composition

The mode-wise composition of the traffic at the survey locations is presented graphically below in Figure 4.4.

Figure 4.4(i): Vehicle Composition at survey locations on Project Road (Survey-I)

60 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Figure 4.4(ii): Vehicle Composition at survey locations on Project Road (survey-II)

61 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.2.7 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)

The traffic plying on any road generally varies over different periods of the year depending on the cycle of different socio-economic activities in the regions through which it passes. Therefore, in order to have a more realistic picture of the traffic on the project road, it is required to assess its seasonal variation to estimate the annual average daily traffic (AADT). The ADT observed during the survey duration is multiplied by a seasonal correction factor (SCF) to derive an AADT. The seasonal correction factor is generally derived from secondary data sources such as past month-wise traffic data on the project road, monthly toll revenues from existing tolled highways in the immediate influence area, sales of fuel at different fuel filling stations along the project highway, arrival of vehicles at establishments like APMC, truck terminals, railway goods stations, etc.

Table 4.6: Variation of Seasonal Correction Factor on the Project Road

Average SCF

Month Year Petrol Diesel

April 1.03 0.92 May 0.73 0.99 June 0.89 0.72 July 1.04 1.21 August 1.09 1.56 September 1.13 1.26 October 1.04 0.77 November 0.96 0.88 December 1.11 1.11 January 1.12 1.27 February 1.14 1.11 March 0.92 0.81 Average 1.0 1.0 For the present study, Fuel sales data on the project road was collected for the period April 13 to March 14, and was considered for analysing SCF. The SCF analysed through the Fuel Sales Data, implies 13% and 26% variation for Petrol and Diesel respectively in the month’s traffic census from the annual average. Such variation can be accounted and attributed to the fact that the traffic reduces substantially on the project road due to monsoon season for

62 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

the months of August and September; and the presence of large number of causeways, of which many are in the vulnerable condition, causes hindrance for the traffic movement.

Since the survey was conducted in the month of September 2014 and the average of seasonal factors was considered for the same month. For buses, as they generally ply on fixed and scheduled routes, a uniform SCF of 1.0 was considered. For cars and other commercial vehicles, SCF of 1.13 and 1.26 respectively is considered, keeping the variations conservative. The SCF values assessed from Fuel Sales data are presented in Table 4.6

The Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) observed by normalizing the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) at the survey location is as given in Table 4.7.

The detailed summary of traffic and ADT has been given in Annexure 2 and Fuel sales data collected from various fuel stations along the Project road are given in Annexure 7.

4.3 TRAVEL PATTERN (ORIGIN – DESTINATION SURVEYS)

In order to understand the travel demand pattern in the region, Origin and Destination (O-D) Surveys were carried out at proposed survey locations as per schedule in Table 4.1. The surveys were typically started in the morning and continued as per schedule. The OD survey elicited characteristics like origin, destination, frequency, purpose and commodity etc. both for passenger and goods vehicles. The information collected during roadside interviews was analyzed to obtain the trip distribution based on a zoning system suitably designed in the study.

4.3.1 Sample Size and Expansion Factors

The vehicles during the OD surveys were interviewed on a random sample basis. Based on the sample size of different categories of vehicles interviewed during the OD survey, expansion factors were calculated for generating the expanded form of OD matrices. The following Table 4.8 shows the direction wise AADT, sample size and expansion factors at the survey locations.

Table 4.8: Sample size collected in Origin-Destination Survey (Tollable vehicles)

MINI Mini 2- 3- Mode CAR BUS LCV MAV Total Bus LCV Axle Axle HS-1 @ Km 40 OD Samples 255 14 77 72 36 73 42 13 582 AADT 853 21 148 209 83 147 155 29 1,646 % age 29.9 65.4 52.1 34.4 43.3 49.5 27.1 44.9 35.4

63 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

HS-2 @ Km 65 OD Samples 109 0 55 47 4 37 68 8 328 AADT 227 1 90 91 5 44 117 10 585 % age 48.0 0.0 61.3 51.8 79.4 83.9 58.0 79.4 56.1 HS-3 @ Km 95 OD Samples 155 2 14 44 3 2 6 2 228 AADT 208 1 28 45 5 6 18 0 311 % age 74.5 158.7 50.5 97.0 59.5 31.7 34.0 0 73.3 HS-4 @ Km 117 OD Samples 77 2 28 19 0 7 1 1 135 AADT 225 1 47 44 5 4 1 0 327 % age 34.2 158.7 60.1 43.1 0.0 185.2 79.4 0 41.3 HS-5 @ Km 154 OD Samples 152 15 42 22 8 11 5 0 255 AADT 453 53 62 45 11 11 5 0 642 % age 33.5 28.3 67.3 48.5 70.5 97.0 99.2 0 39.7 HS-1 @ Km 173 OD Samples 132 24 16 51 9 20 24 2 278 AADT 292 43 17 98 16 34 43 1 545 % age 45.3 56.0 92.3 51.9 54.9 58.8 56.0 158.7 51.1 HS-1 @ Km 201 OD Samples 178 2 12 15 5 11 67 0 290 AADT 311 6 19 37 8 15 125 1 521 % age 57.3 31.7 64.5 41.1 66.1 72.8 53.7 0.0 55.7 Based on the sample size of different categories of vehicles interviewed during the OD survey, direction-wise expansion factors were calculated for the expansion of OD matrices generated from the sample data to assess the travel pattern of the vehicles plying on the project road.

4.3.2 Zoning System

To understand the spatial dimensions of the trip characteristics of the vehicles interviewed during the OD survey, a detailed zoning system was developed giving due consideration to the following factors:

x The road network catering to the traffic on the project road and its generating points x Important towns, villages, factories and industrial centers around the project road. x Administrative boundaries of districts and states. x Configuration of the project road in the regional road network with respect to other roads.

Two major types of areas were identified for analysis purposes; 64 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Immediate Influence Area (IIA): Immediate Influence Area includes the cities/towns/villages and districts along the project road and adjacent to it; which generates/attracts trips to the project road. In this study it consists of Sojat, Sojat Road, Seeriyari, Jojawar, Bagol, Desuri, Sadri, Sewari, Nana and Pindwara along the project road and Pali, Jodhpur, Beawar, , , Sirohi and other districts of Rajasthan.

Broad Influence Area (BIA): Broad Influence Area includes inter-state traffic commuting along the project road. This caters traffic heading to Kandla Port, Mundra Port, Jamnagar in Gujarat, and other states like Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Haryana, Punjab, Delhi, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh and Rest of India.

The zoning system adopted for data collection was based on 72 traffic analysis zones (TAZ). The exhaustive list of zones considered for the analysis is given in Annexure 3.

4.3.3 Regional Distribution

Based on the zoning system devised for this study, the sample data has been expanded using factors based on the total AADT. The expanded O-D matrices for all the vehicle categories on the project road section are presented in Annexure 3.

The traffic for each homogenous section is analyzed keeping in view the movement of traffic between Sojat, Desuri, Sadri and Pindwara considering various factors such as distance, toll locations, terrain etc. The Table 4.9(i) to 4.9(vii) given below show the regional distribution of observed traffic at each survey location.

Table 4.9(i): Regional Distribution of Traffic (in %) at Km40 (OD)

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle MAV Bus LCV Sojat 78.7 96.5 68.1 70.8 64.0 68.8 53.5 44.6 Marwar 6.9 3.5 16.1 9.7 2.9 7.6 16.9 7.1 Desuri 0.6 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 Bali 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 Pindwara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 , Raipur, Sojat 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 1.3 1.2 0.0 Rohat, Pali 5.6 0.0 5.2 8.3 1.0 10.5 8.4 3.5 Rani 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ajmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.2 7.1 Nagaur 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bilara 0.6 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.4 65 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle MAV Bus LCV Jodhpur 1.7 0.0 2.0 3.5 7.7 2.6 0.0 7.1 Bhim, Devgarh 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 7.7 2.0 4.8 15.8 Amet, Kumbalgarh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 Relmarga, Rajsamand 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 1.2 0.0 Nathdwara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Udaipur, Banswara, Dungarpur 0.2 0.0 1.3 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sheoganj, Sirohi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 , Ahore 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bhinmal, Bagora, Sayla 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Barmer 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaisalmer 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 1.5 0.0 0.0 Northern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 , Alwar 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 Eastern Rajasthan 1.6 0.0 1.8 0.0 1.9 1.4 0.0 0.0 Madhya Pradesh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 Gujarat 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.0 2.1 0.7 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 Rest of India 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Private Passenger Traffic: Along the project corridor, Sojat and Marwar are the major traffic generating zones, contributing 86% of the car traffic within project corridor from Sojat to Sojat Road. The other 9% of total car traffic on project road travels from the areas in vicinity of the project road to other surrounding parts of Rajasthan state and remaining 5% of long distance traffic (through Traffic) is being generated from far off places categorized in broad influence areas that are beyond the extremes of corridor.

Public Transport Traffic: It was observed through analysis that, 90% of the buses travel with in the project corridor only and remaining 5% of the buses use the project road to serve other mofussil areas, surrounding the project road, while other 5% is through traffic.

Freight Traffic: Around 70% of the goods traffic is generated from Sojat, Marwar, Desuri, Bali and Pindwara and these trucks move within the project corridor. While 15% of the trucks travel on project corridor which is destined to other areas in the vicinity of the project road and Rajasthan and remaining 15% traffic is through distant traffic, and destined beyond the

66 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

extremes of the project road. Gujarat, Mumbai, and Southern Parts of India forms the part of such regional traffic distribution.

Table 4.9(ii): Regional Distribution of Traffic (in %) at Km65 (OD)

Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle MAV LCV Sojat 16.0 29.1 25.4 25.0 18.3 8.6 6.3 Marwar 59.5 27.9 27.5 12.5 33.6 18.9 12.5 Desuri 0.9 5.5 2.1 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 Bali 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 Pindwara 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaitaran, Raipur, Sojat 1.4 6.4 1.1 0.0 3.8 0.6 0.0 Rohat, Pali 6.3 10.1 3.1 12.5 5.8 0.0 6.3 Rani 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sumerpur 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ajmer 0.9 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nagaur 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 22.4 0.0 Bilara 0.5 0.0 4.5 0.0 1.9 0.0 18.8 Jodhpur 2.6 1.8 4.2 12.5 1.0 8.9 18.8 Bhim, Devgarh 1.4 1.0 17.1 37.5 7.7 3.0 18.8 Amet, Kumbalgarh 0.9 3.8 1.1 0.0 5.8 25.6 18.8 Relmarga, Rajsamand 0.4 0.0 5.2 0.0 3.9 7.7 0.0 Nathdwara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.6 0.0 Udaipur, Banswara, Dungarpur 2.4 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.9 3.0 0.0 Sheoganj, Sirohi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reodar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Abu Road 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jalore, Ahore 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bhinmal, Bagora, Sayla 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Barmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaisalmer 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 Northern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaipur, Alwar 0.4 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Eastern Rajasthan 1.8 8.1 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Madhya Pradesh 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gujarat 0.5 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 Mumbai 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rest of India 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

67 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Private Passenger Traffic: From Sojat Road to Jojawar, Sojat and Marwar are major contributors while Desuri and Pindwara are minor traffic contributing zones, generating a total of 77% on the project road. The 14% of total car traffic on project road travels from the areas in immediate vicinity of the project road to other surrounding parts of Punjab state and remaining 9% of long distance traffic (through Traffic) is being generated from far off places like eastern and northern parts of Rajasthan and commuting upto Udaipur and beyond the state of Rajasthan.

Public Transport Traffic: As per the analysis, 65% of the buses travel with in the project corridor only, 24% of the buses use the project road to serve other mofussil areas, surrounding the project road and rest 11% Public transport movement is regional and this traffic served far off places.

Fright Traffic: Although the section observes very few goods vehicles, but those observed are constitute 40% goods traffic generated from local area and their trips start and end within the project corridor only. Around 52% of the trucks observed seem to be generated from mining areas located off the project road near Rajsamand, but have supply destinations on the project road. Regional traffic normally doesn’t follow this route, but still, 8% of the total goods vehicle observed move across the extremes of the project road.

Table 4.9(iii): Regional Distribution of Traffic (in %) at Km95 (OD)

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle Bus LCV Sojat 7.3 50.0 35.2 12.2 25.0 20.0 16.1 Marwar 37.8 0.0 14.8 32.0 0.0 30.0 17.0 Desuri 44.5 50.0 47.2 37.2 0.0 50.0 16.1 Bali 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pindwara 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaitaran, Raipur, Sojat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 Rohat, Pali 2.9 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 8.0 Rani 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sumerpur 1.9 0.0 0.0 2.1 12.5 0.0 8.9 Ajmer 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nagaur 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bilara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jodhpur 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bhim, Devgarh 0.3 0.0 0.0 2.5 12.5 0.0 0.0 Amet, Kumbalgarh 0.3 0.0 0.0 2.1 25.0 0.0 0.0 Relmarga, Rajsamand 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

68 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle Bus LCV Nathdwara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Udaipur, Banswara, Dungarpur 1.3 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 8.0 Sheoganj, Sirohi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reodar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Abu Road 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jalore, Ahore 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bhinmal, Bagora, Sayla 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Barmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaisalmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.5 0.0 8.9 Northern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaipur, Alwar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Eastern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Madhya Pradesh 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gujarat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.5 0.0 8.9 Mumbai 0.3 0.0 2.8 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rest of India 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 4.9(iv): Regional Distribution of Traffic (in %) at Km117 (OD)

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus 2Axle Bus LCV 1.3 0.0 5.5 0.0 0.0 Sojat 14.1 0.0 26.6 18.1 30.6 Marwar 75.1 50.0 33.8 68.6 45.8 Desuri 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bali 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pindwara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaitaran, Raipur, Sojat 0.0 0.0 3.7 2.9 4.2 Rohat, Pali 2.5 0.0 12.6 7.6 4.2 Rani 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sumerpur 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ajmer

69 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus 2Axle Bus LCV 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nagaur 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bilara 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 Jodhpur 1.4 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 Bhim, Devgarh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Amet, Kumbalgarh 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Relmarga, Rajsamand 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nathdwara 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.1 Udaipur, Banswara, Dungarpur 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sheoganj, Sirohi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reodar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Abu Road 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jalore, Ahore 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bhinmal, Bagora, Sayla 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Barmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaisalmer 0.0 50.0 12.5 0.0 0.0 Northern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaipur, Alwar 0.7 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 Eastern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Madhya Pradesh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gujarat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mumbai 0.6 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 Rest of India Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 4.9(v): Regional Distribution of Traffic (in %) at Km154 (OD)

70 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle Bus LCV Sojat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Marwar 14.8 23.6 17.7 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Desuri 8.5 6.9 12.2 3.2 23.6 4.6 16.7 Bali 55.1 51.4 29.9 56.4 33.3 45.4 50.0 Pindwara 3.9 5.6 10.8 4.8 5.6 18.3 0.0 Jaitaran, Raipur, Sojat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rohat, Pali 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rani 0.7 2.8 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sumerpur 12.5 9.7 18.7 27.5 37.5 31.7 16.7 Ajmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nagaur 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bilara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jodhpur 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bhim, Devgarh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Amet, Kumbalgarh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Relmarga, Rajsamand 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nathdwara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Udaipur, Banswara, Dungarpur 1.3 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sheoganj, Sirohi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reodar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Abu Road 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jalore, Ahore 1.3 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.0 16.7 Bhinmal, Bagora, Sayla 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Barmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaisalmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Northern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaipur, Alwar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Eastern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Madhya Pradesh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gujarat 0.7 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mumbai 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rest of India 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 4.9(vi): Regional Distribution of Traffic (in %) at Km174 (OD)

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle MAV Bus LCV Sojat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 71 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle MAV Bus LCV Marwar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Desuri 2.9 0.0 12.5 7.8 4.8 14.8 6.8 0.0 Bali 59.5 50.5 25.5 55.2 51.3 32.9 33.6 0.0 Pindwara 6.2 1.8 12.5 3.9 26.7 27.2 21.4 0.0 Jaitaran, Raipur, Sojat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rohat, Pali 1.8 1.8 0.0 1.9 0.0 2.7 2.5 0.0 Rani 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 2.5 0.0 Sumerpur 21.6 42.2 31.3 16.5 17.1 12.4 22.5 100.0 Ajmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nagaur 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bilara 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jodhpur 0.4 1.8 3.4 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 Bhim, Devgarh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Amet, Kumbalgarh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Relmarga, Rajsamand 0.0 0.0 2.9 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 Nathdwara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Udaipur, Banswara, Dungarpur 2.0 1.8 2.9 0.0 0.0 4.7 1.8 0.0 Sheoganj, Sirohi 0.3 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reodar 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Abu Road 1.1 0.0 2.9 2.9 0.0 0.0 5.4 0.0 Jalore, Ahore 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bhinmal, Bagora, Sayla 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Barmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaisalmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Northern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaipur, Alwar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Eastern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Madhya Pradesh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gujarat 0.3 0.0 6.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mumbai 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rest of India 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 4.9(vii): Regional Distribution of Traffic (in %) at Km201 (OD)

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle Bus LCV Sojat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Marwar 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.8 11.1 4.2 0.9 72 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Mini Mini Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle Bus LCV Desuri 0.6 0.0 13.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 Bali 44.4 20.0 16.7 47.2 38.9 18.1 44.3 Pindwara 39.9 50.0 38.1 47.2 41.7 45.8 50.0 Jaitaran, Raipur, Sojat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rohat, Pali 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rani 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sumerpur 2.3 30.0 20.3 0.0 0.0 27.8 2.7 Ajmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nagaur 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bilara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jodhpur 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bhim, Devgarh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Amet, Kumbalgarh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Relmarga, Rajsamand 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nathdwara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Udaipur, Banswara, Dungarpur 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.0 Sheoganj, Sirohi 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.3 0.0 0.0 Reodar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Abu Road 1.9 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jalore, Ahore 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bhinmal, Bagora, Sayla 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Barmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaisalmer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Northern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jaipur, Alwar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Eastern Rajasthan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Madhya Pradesh 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gujarat 3.7 0.0 11.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mumbai 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rest of India 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

As far as second segment of the road is concerned, i.e. from Sadri to Pindwara, Bali and Pindwara are the major traffic generating zones. Also, due to the cement factory in the vicinity i.e. Binani and Ambuja, Pindwara contributes the major share in the freight movement on the road.

73 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.3.4 Commodity Distribution

The O–D survey data has been analysed to identify the commodity movement characteristics along the project road. The data of composition of the different commodities being transported using the project road section is compiled and is given below in Table 4.10(i) to (vii).

Table 4.10(i): Commodity Distribution @Km 40 (in %)

In Percentages Commodity Type Mini LCV LCV 2-Axle 3-Axle MAV Food Grains / Pulses & Spices 4.2 2.8 2.7 0.0 7.7 Milk, Fruits & Vegetables 2.8 5.6 4.1 0.0 7.7 Processed /Packaged Food / Edible Oil 5.6 2.8 1.4 0.0 0.0 Cotton / Clothing Or Synthetic Yarn / 1.4 0.0 2.7 2.4 0.0 Fibers Textiles / Clothing / Readymade Garments 1.4 8.3 0.0 4.8 7.7 Leather Products 1.4 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Handicrafts 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 Petroleum Products / HSD/ Petrol 8.3 2.8 4.1 2.4 0.0 Minerals And Ores 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.4 7.7 Iron & Steel (Aluminum Or Metal ) Road / 4.2 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 Bars / Sheets Timber / Wood And Products 1.4 2.8 1.4 0.0 0.0 Paper/Parcel 0.0 0.0 1.4 2.4 0.0 Coke / Coal 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Automobiles & Auto Spare Parts 0.0 2.8 1.4 0.0 0.0 Rubber / Plastics 1.4 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 Tyres 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pharmaceutical Products 1.4 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 Building materials 9.7 11.1 27.4 19.0 15.4 Others 6.9 16.7 9.6 7.1 0.0 Empty 44.4 38.9 37.0 54.8 53.8 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Table 4.10(ii): Commodity Distribution @Km 65(in %)

In Percentages Commodity Type Mini LCV LCV 2-Axle 3-Axle MAV Food Grains / Pulses & Spices 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 Milk, Fruits & Vegetables 19.1 25.0 5.4 8.8 0.0 Processed /Packaged Food / Edible Oil 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Petroleum Products / HSD/ Petrol 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 Minerals And Ores 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.4 0.0

74 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

In Percentages Commodity Type Mini LCV LCV 2-Axle 3-Axle MAV Iron & Steel (Aluminum Or Metal ) Road / 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bars / Sheets Timber / Wood And Products 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Paper/Parcel 2.1 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 Automobiles & Auto Spare Parts 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Machines & Auto Spare Parts 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 Rubber / Plastics 2.1 25.0 0.0 8.8 0.0 Building materials 8.5 0.0 32.4 35.3 37.5 Others 17.0 0.0 5.4 0.0 0.0 Empty 40.4 50.0 48.6 38.2 62.5 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Table 4.10(iii): Commodity Distribution @Km 95(in %)

In Percentages Commodity Type Mini LCV LCV 2-Axle 3-Axle MAV Food Grains / Pulses & Spices 6.8 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 Milk, Fruits & Vegetables 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Processed /Packaged Food / Edible Oil 2.3 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Petroleum Products / HSD/ Petrol 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Iron & Steel (Aluminum Or Metal ) Road / 2.3 0.0 0.0 16.7 0.0 Bars / Sheets Timber / Wood And Products 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Automobiles & Auto Spare Parts 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.7 0.0 Building materials 18.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Others 13.6 33.3 50.0 50.0 0.0 Empty 50.0 33.3 0.0 16.7 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Table 4.10(iv): Commodity Distribution @Km 117 (in %)

In Percentages 3- Commodity Type Mini LCV 2-Axle MAV Axle Food Grains / Pulses & Spices 10.5 14.3 0.0 0.0 Petroleum Products / HSD/ Petrol 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 Iron & Steel (Aluminum Or Metal ) Road / 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bars / Sheets Building materials 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 Others 21.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Empty 63.2 57.1 100.0 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

75 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.10(v): Commodity Distribution @Km 159 (in %)

In Percentages Commodity Type Mini LCV LCV 2-Axle 3-Axle Milk, Fruits & Vegetables 13.6 25.0 18.2 0.0 Processed /Packaged Food / Edible Oil 13.6 0.0 18.2 0.0 Textiles / Clothing / Readymade Garments 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 Leather Products 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 Minerals And Ores 13.6 12.5 0.0 0.0 Iron & Steel (Aluminum Or Metal ) Road / 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bars / Sheets Timber / Wood And Products 9.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pharmaceutical Products 9.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Building materials 4.5 12.5 9.1 0.0 Others 4.5 25.0 0.0 20.0 Empty 27.3 25.0 54.5 40.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Table 4.10(vi): Commodity Distribution @Km 174 (in %)

In Percentages Commodity Type Mini LCV LCV 2-Axle 3-Axle MAV Food Grains / Pulses & Spices 0.0 11.1 0.0 8.3 50.0 Milk, Fruits & Vegetables 9.8 11.1 5.0 8.3 0.0 Processed /Packaged Food / Edible Oil 9.8 0.0 5.0 4.2 0.0 Cotton / Clothing Or Synthetic Yarn / 0.0 0.0 10.0 4.2 0.0 Fibers Textiles / Clothing / Readymade Garments 3.9 11.1 5.0 0.0 0.0 Petroleum Products / HSD/ Petrol 5.9 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 Minerals And Ores 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Iron & Steel (Aluminum Or Metal ) Road / 3.9 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 Bars / Sheets Timber / Wood And Products 2.0 0.0 5.0 4.2 0.0 Paper/Parcel 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.0 Automobiles & Auto Spare Parts 0.0 0.0 5.0 4.2 0.0 Chemicals/Fertilizers 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Building materials 15.7 0.0 15.0 25.0 0.0 Electronic/Computers/Electric 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Others 13.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Empty 29.4 66.7 35.0 37.5 50.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

76 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.10(vii): Commodity Distribution @Km 201 (in %)

In Percentages Commodity Type Mini LCV LCV 2-Axle 3-Axle MAV Handicrafts 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Building materials 6.7 20.0 45.5 32.8 0.0 Electronic/Computers/Electric 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 Empty 86.7 60.0 54.5 65.7 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 4.3.5 Trip length frequency Distribution

Below Table 4.11 and Figure 4.5 presents the Trip length frequency distribution curves for passenger and goods vehicles on project corridor.

Table 4.11: Trip length frequency distribution

Mini - Trip length Car Mini Bus Bus LCV 2Axle 3Axle MAV Total LCV up to 5km 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5km-20km 10.0% 5.7% 5.7% 5.3% 5.0% 2.5% 0.0% 5.6% 6.2% 20km-50km 50.2% 91.4% 39.1% 47.9% 30.0% 6.6% 13.4% 26.8% 37.2% 50km-100km 9.8% 2.9% 23.0% 27.7% 8.8% 15.6% 15.1% 7.0% 13.3% 100km -150km 11.1% 0.0% 6.9% 8.5% 11.3% 9.0% 7.0% 7.0% 9.1% 150km -200km 4.7% 0.0% 5.7% 5.3% 5.0% 4.9% 6.4% 9.9% 5.3% 200km-250km 7.7% 0.0% 8.0% 5.3% 6.3% 5.7% 6.4% 9.9% 6.9% 250km-500km 2.8% 0.0% 5.7% 0.0% 15.0% 26.2% 18.6% 12.7% 9.1% 500km-1000km 3.0% 0.0% 4.6% 0.0% 15.0% 25.4% 23.3% 18.3% 10.1% above 1000km 0.9% 0.0% 1.1% 0.0% 3.8% 4.1% 9.9% 2.8% 2.8% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

77 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Figure 4.5: Trip length frequency distribution Curve

4.4 TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SURVEY

The survey was conducted on all major intersections and the turning movement behavior was considered for all the possible directions. An analysis of the hourly variation along with Peak hour volume has been done at all the major junctions. This would further help to ascertain capacities of all these intersections, and based on the existing characteristics, suitable intersection design has been proposed in terms of entry width, entry radius, channelization etc. The Vehicle Classification, Hourly variation and Peak Hour Characteristics have also been given in Annexure 6.

4.5 AXLE LOAD SURVEY

Axle load survey was carried out along with OD survey at Km40+000 and Km154+000, near the 7 days traffic volume count survey location. The survey was conducted to estimate the cumulative number of equivalent standard axles based on the survey of goods vehicles flows and axle weight distribution and estimate the vehicle damage factor which causes damage to the pavement

78 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.5.1 Vehicle Damage Factor

The axle load surveys were conducted at all prioritized locations, the spectrum of axle loads and the numbers of equivalent 8.16 t standard axles for the different categories of commercial vehicles have been determined on the basis of the axle load surveys.

The equations for computing equivalency factor for single, tandem and tridem axles given below is used as directed in the IRC:37-2012 for converting different axle load repetitions into equivalent standard axle load repetitions;

Single axle with single wheel on either side = {axle load in KN / 65}4

Single axle with dual wheel on either side = {axle load in KN / 80}4

Tandem axle with single wheel on either side = {axle load in KN / 148}4

Tridem axle with dual wheel on either side = {axle load in KN / 224}4

As the proposed road is a two lane single carriageway with granular shoulders, the higher VDF is being considered for design from VDF of both directions. The data utilized for the analysis of Vehicle Damage Factors (VDF) is presented in Annexure 4. The calculated VDF’s are summarized in Table 4.12.

Table 4.12: Summary of Vehicle Damage Factor (No overloading control)

@Km 40 @Km 159 Vehicle Class Sojat to Desuri to Adopted Sadri to Pindwara Adopted Desuri Sojat Value Pindwara to Sadri Value BUS 1.16 1.09 1.16 1.12 1.04 1.12 Mini BUS 0.41 0.35 0.41 0.66 0.84 0.84 LCV 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.02 0.04 0.04 2 Axle 5.89 4.43 5.89 0.21 4.40 4.40 3 Axle 7.40 6.19 7.40 3.29 3.24 3.29 MAV 9.94 7.83 9.94 0.00 0.00 9.94

The adopted values are utilized for calculating Million Standard Axles on the Project and respective values are further used in designing the crust thickness as explained in Pavement

79 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Design Chapter. The summary of MSA calculations for design period of 12 years and subsequent period is given in Annexure 7.

4.6 METHODOLOGY

The basic methodology of assessment of the diversion analysis includes following input details, which can be summarized as follows:

a. Road Network: Identify the Project road with its Surrounding alternate routes on a Regional Road Network.

b. Link Characteristic File: Prepare a Link Characteristics File for all the sections of the road network, which are assumed to contribute to diversion traffic. The parameters which shall be accounted for all the link sections are: Link Length, Road width, Lane Configuration, status on Tolling of the section, Road Condition, Roughness, Rise and Fall, Gradient and the speed characteristics on the route.(Refer Table 4.13)

c. Assessment of Road User Cost: As per IRC:SP-30 (2009), Road user cost includes following costs:

Vehicle Operating Cost (VOC) & Value of Time (VOT): This has been assessed by considering the equations given in IRC: SP-30(2009) - Annexure 6 for different typology of vehicles viz. New Technology cars, Old Technology Cars, Buses, Light Commercial Vehicles, Heavy Commercial Vehicles, Multi-Axle Trucks. Toll Cost: This is assessed for the project road on the basis of Toll Policy obtained from Public Works Department (Rajasthan Road Development) Fee Rules Notification (PPP Projects with VGF), Jaipur (22nd September, 2009). While for the alternative routes, the toll rates data have been collected from site. In case of upcoming toll roads, the same policy has been applied for assessment of toll cost.

d. Assessment of Traffic: The existing traffic is analysed and AADT observed on the project road and the surrounding roads is calculated from the traffic observed during traffic surveys. For assessment of potential divertible traffic, the origin and destination survey was conducted and the data was analysed further to give potential divertible traffic from the various streams observed on the project road and the surrounding roads. This is done on an assumption that the common traffic analysis zones (TAZ) considered for diversion have an option to commute either through project road or via alternate road in the vicinity of the project road. Refer Table 3.2 for the traffic zones considered for different route options and a stream of flow is established between the two extremes of project road viz. the origin and destination. Refer Table 3.4 for Potential divertible traffic as summarized in Diversion analysis, which is merely the summation of total traffic for the various streams considered in the OD matrix.

80 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

e. Diversion Analysis: Now, considering the above traffic and cost implications of VOC, VOT and Toll costs, percentage Diversion is calculated from the equations as per the Wilbur Smith studies for CRRI and RUCS which have been included in IRC:SP-30 (2009). The equations have been given in Table 3.3 and with respect to various route choice options; the percentage diversion of the potential divertible is summarized in detail below.

4.6.1 Identification of Alternative Route

The alternative route have been discovered and identified based on the fact, that the corridor will serve the commuter the common origin and destination points, and the user is expected to travel the corridor based on route choice modelling, which is further governed by cheaper generalized cost.

The Figure 4.6 given below shows the surrounding road network and all the common nodes and points attributing diversion have been named accordingly. Based on this diagram, the link characteristics file has been prepared which shows the length, road condition, Rise and fall, Roughness and other VOC parameters have been considered, as shown in Table 4.13 below.

81 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Nearest village Sansari at 550m Population 3992

Nearest village Amaliya at 200m Population 1224

Figure 4.6: Link Diagram for Sojat-Pindwara

82 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.13: Link Characteristics File

Sojat - Pindwara section of SH-62 In the state of Rajasthan

Linkwise Network Characterstics

Length Tolled Divided-1/ Lanes Area Road Terrain Roughness Rise/Fall ADOPTED SPEEDS S No Road/Section Road name condition condition (Km) Undivided-2 (1/2/4/6) (Urban-1/Rural-2) RG RF Car Mini Bus Bus MLCV LCV 2A 3A MAV

AB 101 Sojat - Sojat road PR - SH-62 10.00 N 2 2L 2 Good plain 2000 10 50 40 40 45 40 35 30 25

BC 102 Sojat Road - Jojawar PR - SH-62 43.00 Y 2 2L 2 Good plain 2000 10 50 40 40 45 40 35 30 25

CD 103 Jojawar - Desuri PR - SH-62 35.00 Y 2 2L 2 Good plain 2000 10 50 40 40 45 40 35 30 25

DE 104 Desuri - Sadri SH-16 16.00 N 2 IL 2 Good plain 4000 15 45 35 35 40 35 30 25 20

EF 105 Sadri - Sewari PR - SH-62 23.00 N 2 2L 2 Good plain 2000 10 50 40 40 45 40 35 30 25 FG 106 Sewari - Bera PR - SH-62 14.00 Y 2 2L 2 Good plain 2000 10 50 40 40 45 40 35 30 25

GH 107 Bera - Pindwara PR - SH-62 36.00 N 2 2L 2 Good plain 2000 10 50 40 40 45 40 35 30 25

AI 108 Sojat - Pali NH-62 40.00 Y 1 4L 2 Good plain 2000 10 70 55 50 55 50 45 40 35

IJ 109 Pali - NH-62 55.00 Y 1 4L 2 Good plain 2000 10 70 55 50 55 50 45 40 35

JK 110 Sanderao - Sheoganj NH-62 21.00 N 1 4L 2 Good plain 2000 10 70 55 50 55 50 45 40 35

KL 111 Sheoganj - Sirohi NH-62 38.00 Y 1 4L 2 Good plain 2000 10 70 55 50 55 50 45 40 35 LH 112 Sirohi - Pindwara NH-62 25.00 N 1 4L 2 Good plain 2000 10 70 55 50 55 50 45 40 35

ID 113 Pali - Desuri SH-67 70.00 Y 2 2LP 2 Good plain 2000 10 55 45 45 50 45 40 35 30

IC 114 Pali - Jojawar MDR 59.00 N 2 IL 2 Good plain 4000 15 45 35 35 40 35 30 25 20

KF 115 Sheoganj - Sewari MDR 27.00 N 2 IL 2 Good plain 4000 15 45 35 35 40 35 30 25 20

XY 117 Beawar - Devgarh NH-8 86.00 Y 2 2LP 2 Good Rolling 4000 10 55 45 45 50 45 40 35 30 YC 119 Devgarh - Jojawar MDR 20.00 N 2 IL 2 Fair Rolling 4000 15 45 35 35 40 35 30 25 20

XA 120 Beawar - Sojat NH-62 70.00 Y 1 4L 2 Good Plain 2000 10 70 55 50 55 50 45 40 35

YZ 121 Devgarh - Gomati NH-8 35.00 N 2 2LP 2 Good Rolling 4000 10 55 45 45 50 45 40 35 30

ZD 122 Gomati - Desuri SH-16 26.00 N 2 2LP 2 Good Rolling 4000 10 55 45 45 50 45 40 35 30

KG 116 Sheoganj - Bera MDR 24.00 N 2 IL 2 Good plain 4000 15 45 35 35 40 35 30 25 20

83 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.6.2 Assessment of Potential Divertible Traffic

To assess the potential divertible traffic, additional traffic volume count stations were surveyed along with Origin and Destination Surveys and the location of these survey stations have been identified based on the target streams to be captured and are expected to be divert on the project road.

Following Table 4.14 presents the Origin and Destination zones streams, which are expected to divert on the project corridor from 3 identified alternate routes.

Table 4.14: Potential Route Choice Options

Via Project Road OD Zones which (SH-62) fall beyond Sojat Sendra, Bar, Raipur, Chandawal, Sojat, Jaitaran, Nagaur, Bikaner, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh, RC -1: Sojat to (ABCDEFGH) and Beawar in Pindwara Via NH-62 the north and Reodar, Sanchore, Deesa, , Radhanpur, (Positive) (Beawar – Pali – moving beyond Surat, , Jamnagar, Kandla Port, Mundra Port, Mumbai, Maharashtra, and other parts Pindwara road) Pindwara in of Gujarat (AIJKLH) Southern extreme

Via Project road Taking traffic Beawar, Ajmer, Kishangarh, Nasirabad, Jaipur, & NH-8 streams from Alwar, Bharatpur, Dausa, Haryana, Delhi, Uttar (XYCDEFGH) Beyond Beawar Pradesh RC -2: Beawar in north to to Pindwara Via Beawar – Pali Pindwara and (Positive) – Pindwara road immediate Pindwara, Palanpur, Deesa, Mahesana (NH-62) Gujarat state (AIJKLH) areas Beawar, Sendra, Bar, Raipur, Chandawal, Sojat, Via Project road Ajmer, Kishangarh, Nasirabad, Jaitaran, Jodhpur, OD zones which (SH-62) Nagaur, Bikaner, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh, Jaipur, RC -3: Sojat to fall beyond (ABCD) Alwar, Bharatpur, Dausa, Punjab, Haryana, Delhi, Desuri Desuri and East Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Himachal and J&K. (Positive) Via SH-67 (Pali- of Project road to Desuri, Bali, Pindwara, Sirohi, Bhim, Devgarh, - Desuri) Sojat and beyond Rajsamand (AID) Based on the traffic survey on the alternate routes and the origin and destination survey, the tollable potential diverted traffic was captures and assessed likewise.

84 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Now to assess the total divertible traffic of this potential traffic is done on the basis of RUCS diversion equations given in Table 4.15 and Diversion curve in Figure 4.7(i) for Cars and Figure 4.7(ii) for Trucks.

Table 4.15: Diversion Curve Equations

Vehicle Cost Ratio (CR) Interval Equations

<= 0.634 %Div = 98.750 - (CR/0.634) * 8.125

Car 0.634 <= CR <= 1.465 %Div = 90.625 - ((CR-0.634)/0.831) * 84.375

1.465 <= CR <= 2.0 %Div = 6.25 - ((CR-1.465)/0.535) * 5.25

<= 0.750 %Div = 100 - ((CR/0.75) * 5)

Truck & Bus 0.750 <= CR <= 1.250 %Div = 95 - ((CR-0.75)/0.5) * 90

1.250 <= CR <= 2.0 %Div = ((2-CR)/0.75) * 5

Figure 4.7: Diversion Curve for Cars and Trucks

85 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

In the above equations, CR is the Cost Ratio, which is the ratio of total generalized transportation cost on Project road (PR) to that of the Alternate road (AR) and the % Diversion is based on this Cost ratio only, attributing willingness of traffic diversion behaviour on and off the project road. Based on this cost ratio, the route choices for the above mentioned route choices is worked out separately and then net effect of the following analysis is considered.

86 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.6.2.1 RC-1: Project road v/s NH-62 for Sojat to Pindwara

The first route choice comparison has been established between the project road from Sojat to Pindwara, which may have following two choices of commuting between the two extremes of the project road as follows:

a. Project road (ABCDEFGH) – Sojat to Pindwara via Desuri and Sadri b. Alternate Road (AIJKLH) – Sojat to Pindwara via Pali, Sheoganj and Sirohi

The Sojat – Pali – Pindwara link is a segment of NH-62 (earlier NH-14), which is being widened to four lane by NHAI (PIU, Rajasthan) on BOT basis from Beawar to Pindwara. The link constitutes 4 Toll plazas as shown in the location map below in Figure 4.7 and given below in Table 4.15. Although the construction has not completed and thus Toll Plazas are not operational during the consultants’ study in December, 2014.

87 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.15: Toll Plaza on Alternate Route (NH-62)

S.No. Toll Plaza location Village Name

1 Km 27+500 of NH-62 Raipur

2 Km 93+750 of NH-62 Indira Nagar

3 Km 154+000 of NH-62 Bairami

4 Km 202+315 of NH-62 Uthaman

The link is expected to drive positive diversion of traffic on the project road as the two corridors runs geographically parallel to each other. Thus the commuter has choice of travelling through the two corridors. The choice may be influence by the travel time, and travel cost on the prima facie. Currently there is hardly any movement of the traffic along the project road, and traffic is enjoying the Untolled four lane facility in the completed segments of the NH-62 to commute across the two extreme points of the project road. It is also assumed that, the traffic of the project road too might have migrated towards the alternate route, due to better road infrastructure facilities. This can be induced from the traffic volume observed in the base year of assessment of the traffic, which is quite low as compared to the traffic census volume observed from the traffic census details obtained from the PWD office. And thus in the light of above assumption, it can be induced that traffic on the project road would increase after the upgradation of the corridor due to following reasons:

1. The toll on the alternate route would be imposed soon after the completion of the construction on NH-62, which would cause significant diversion. 2. The normal traffic, which was earlier using the project road, but moved off the project road to alternate road, would return to project road due to improved mobility conditions. The extent of diversion is analyzed on the basis of Diversion model and the Road User Cost study equations. The speed characteristics assumed on the two routes have been estimated based on the total distance and the total travel time on routes as shown in Table 4.16.

Table 4.16: Speed Characteristic

Alternate Road Project Road

Lane Intermediate 4Lane 2 Lane (2L) 2 lane Configuration Lane (IL) (4L)

Car 45 55 70 50 88 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Mini Bus 35 45 55 40 Bus 35 45 50 40 LCV 35 45 50 40 2A 30 40 45 35 3A 25 35 40 30 MAV 20 30 35 25 The abstract of the route and the corresponding link characteristics’ comparison is shown in Table 4.17.

Table 4.17: Route Characteristic comparison for RC-1

Route Project Road Characteristics Link Name AB BC CD DE EF FG GH Road Section Sojat – Sojat Jojawar Desuri Sadri – Vopari Nana - Sojat Road – – – Sadri Vopari – Pindwara Road Jojawar Desuri Nana Road Name SH-62 SH-62 SH-62 SH-62 SH-62 SH-62 SH-62 Link Length (Km) 10 43 35 16 23 14 36 Tolled (Y-Yes / N- N N Y N N N Y No) Divided(1)/ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Undivided(2) Lanes 2L 2L 2L IL 2L 2L 2L (1L/2L/2LP/4LP/6LP) Area (Urban-1 / 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Rural-2) Road Condition Good Good Good Good Good Good Good Terrain Condition Plain Plain Plain Plain Plain Plain Plain Roughness (mm/Km) 2000 2000 2000 4000 2000 2000 2000 Rise and Fall (m/Km) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Route Alternate Road (NH-62: Sojat – Pali – Pindwara) Characteristics Link Name AI IJ JK KL LH Road Section Sojat – Pali – Sanderao – Sheoganj Sirohi - Pali Sanderao Sheoganj – Sirohi Pindwara Road Name NH-62 NH-62 NH-62 NH-62 NH-62 Link Length (Km) 40 55 21 38 25 Tolled (Y-Yes / N- Y Y N Y N No) 89 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Divided(1)/ 1 1 1 1 1 Undivided(2) Lanes 4L 4L 4L 4L 4L (1L/2L/2LP/4LP/6LP) Area (Urban-1 / 2 2 2 2 2 Rural-2) Road Condition Good Good Good Good Good Terrain Condition Plain Plain Plain Plain Plain Roughness (mm/Km) 2000 2000 2000 4000 2000 Rise and Fall (m/Km) 10 10 10 10 10 The above link and speed characteristics were utilized for estimating Vehicle Operating Cost (including Value of Time) per Km, VOC+VOT per Km, on the basis of RUCS equations, as given in Annexure 6. The total divertible traffic is estimated based on the diversion equations in Table 4.15 and by plugging in the following input parameters:

x Vehicle Operating Cost (including Value of Time) – The link wise VOT+VOC is summarized in Table 3.7. x Adopted Speeds (as given in Table 4.16) x Toll rates – Toll rates have been worked out on the basis of applicable Toll Policy received from PWD office, as shown in Table 4.18.

Table 4.18: VOC+VOT as per Km as per RUCS & applicable Toll Rates

Project Road Toll Link Name AB BC CD DE EF FG GH Rates Car 13.82 13.82 13.82 15.29 13.82 13.82 13.82 205.00 Mini Bus 25.87 25.87 25.87 26.42 25.87 25.87 25.87 300.00 Bus 79.62 79.62 79.62 80.35 79.62 79.62 79.62 605.00 LCV 28.52 28.52 28.52 30.66 28.52 28.52 28.52 300.00 2A 33.24 33.24 33.24 40.42 33.24 33.24 33.24 605.00 3A 49.85 49.85 49.85 60.63 49.85 49.85 49.85 995.00 MAV 70.99 70.99 70.99 90.89 70.99 70.99 70.99 1205.00

Alternative Road Toll Link Name AI IJ JK KL LH Rates Car 12.47 12.47 12.47 12.47 12.47 210.00 Mini Bus 24.73 24.73 24.73 24.73 24.73 330.00 Bus 69.82 69.82 69.82 69.82 69.82 540.00 LCV 28.59 28.59 28.59 28.59 28.59 330.00 2A 34.46 34.46 34.46 34.46 34.46 540.00 3A 51.68 51.68 51.68 51.68 51.68 870.00 MAV 72.68 72.68 72.68 72.68 72.68 870.00 90 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

The per Km cost variables were further worked out to estimate the total generalized cost on the project road and the alternate roads, and Cost Ratio (CR) was calculated for all types of vehicles, and using appropriate CR value, the %diversion is calculated. The Table 4.19 shows the summary of the %Diversion observed on the basis of Cost Ratio.

Table 4.19: Summary of Cost Ratio Diversion for RC-1

Cost % Project Road Alternative Road Ratio Diversion VOC+VOT Toll Rate Total VOC+VOT Toll Rate Total PR/AR to PR Car 2469 205 2674 2232 210 2442 1.10 43.81 Mini 45.06 Bus 4588 300 4888 4427 330 4757 1.03 Bus 14105 605 14710 12497 540 13037 1.13 26.91 LCV 5083 300 5383 5118 330 5448 0.99 52.15 2A 5998 605 6603 6168 540 6708 0.98 52.81 3A 8997 995 9992 9251 870 10121 0.99 52.31 MAV 12884 1205 14089 13009 870 13879 1.02 47.28 *as per Diversion equations

In the summary table, Cost Ratio is taken as travel cost on Project road (CR= PR/AR). This is to assess the diversion behaviour of traffic from the Alternate road to Project Road. In case of cars, as seen above, even if the cost implication shows higher cost of travel on alternate road to project road, there is a significant diversion observed as per the diversion equations.

Now, to assess the traffic diverted from this %Diversion, the potential divertible traffic is estimated from the valid OD pairs, on which this Route Choice is applicable. So, in order to assess the potential quantum of traffic flowing between the two extremes, the Traffic analysis zones were categorized into two across the extremes of the common nodes (A node and H node in this case). The areas considered have been summarized in Table 4.13. The total traffic diverted from the potential divertible traffic is shown in Table 4.20.

Table 4.20: Summary of Potential Diverted Traffic

Traffic Diversion to Vehicle Type % of Traffic Diversion Potential Diverted Traffic Project road Car 43.81 37 16 Mini Bus 45.06 0 0 Bus 26.91 2 1 MLCV 43.81 0 0 LCV 52.15 1 1

91 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

2A 52.81 10 5 3A 52.31 40 21 MAV 47.28 55 26 Total 144 69 PCU 440 213

92 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.6.2.2 RC-2: Project road v/s NH-62 for Beawar to Pindwara

The second route choice comparison has been established between the project road from Beawar to Pindwara, which may have following two choices of commuting between the two extremes of the project road as follows:

c. Project road (XYCDEFGH) – Beawar to Pindwara via Devgarh, Jojawar, Desuri and Sadri d. Alternate Road (XAIJKLH) – Beawar to Pindwara via Pali, Sheoganj and Sirohi

The above route analysis is done with an assumption that if the 12 Km link road between NH-8 and SH-62 from Devgarh to Jojawar is improved, then the project road may observe significant traffic diverted on it, being generated from areas beyond Beawar and moving across Pindwara.

The extent of diversion is analyzed on the basis of Diversion model and the Road User Cost study equations. The speed characteristics assumed on the two routes have been estimated based on the total distance and the total travel time on routes as shown in Table 4.17.

93 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

The abstract of the route and the corresponding link characteristics’ comparison is shown in Table 4.21.

Table 4.21: Route Characteristic comparison for RC-2

Route Project Road Characteristics Link Name XY YC CD DE EF FG GH Road Section Beawar - Devgarh Jojawar Desuri Sadri – Vopari Nana - Devgarh - Jojawar – – Sadri Vopari – Pindwara Desuri Nana Road Name NH-8 SH-61 SH-62 SH-62 SH-62 SH-62 SH-62 Link Length (Km) 86 20 35 16 23 14 36 Tolled (Y-Yes / N- Y N Y N N N Y No) Divided(1)/ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Undivided(2) Lanes 2LP 2L 2L IL 2L 2L 2L (1L/2L/2LP/4LP/6LP) Area (Urban-1 / 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Rural-2) Road Condition Good Good Good Good Good Good Good Terrain Condition Plain Plain Plain Plain Plain Plain Plain Roughness (mm/Km) 2000 2000 2000 4000 2000 2000 2000 Rise and Fall (m/Km) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Route Alternate Road (NH-62: Beawar – Pali – Pindwara) Characteristics Link Name XA AI IJ JK KL LH Road Section Beawar Sojat – Pali – Sanderao – Sheoganj Sirohi - - Sojat Pali Sanderao Sheoganj – Sirohi Pindwara Road Name NH-62 NH-62 NH-62 NH-62 NH-62 NH-62 Link Length (Km) 70 40 55 21 38 25 Tolled (Y-Yes / N- Y Y Y N Y N No) Divided(1)/ 1 1 1 1 1 1 Undivided(2) Lanes 4L 4L 4L 4L 4L 4L (1L/2L/2LP/4LP/6LP) Area (Urban-1 / 2 2 2 2 2 2

94 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Rural-2) Road Condition Good Good Good Good Good Good Terrain Condition Plain Plain Plain Plain Plain Plain Roughness (mm/Km) 2000 2000 2000 2000 4000 2000 Rise and Fall (m/Km) 10 10 10 10 10 10 The above link and speed characteristics were utilized for estimating Vehicle Operating Cost (including Value of Time) per Km, VOC+VOT per Km, on the basis of RUCS equations, as given in Annexure 6. The total divertible traffic is estimated based on the diversion equations in Table 4.15 and by plugging in the following input parameters:

x Vehicle Operating Cost (including Value of Time) – The link wise VOT+VOC is summarized in Table 4.22. x Adopted Speeds (as given in Table 4.17) x Toll rates – Toll rates have been worked out on the basis of applicable Toll Policy received from PWD office, as shown in Table 4.22.

Table 4.22: VOC+VOT as per Km as per RUCS & applicable Toll Rates

Project Road Toll Link Name XY YC CD DE EF FG GH Rates Car 14.49 15.29 13.82 15.29 13.82 13.82 13.82 205.00 Mini Bus 26.93 26.42 25.87 26.42 25.87 25.87 25.87 310.00 Bus 81.03 80.35 79.62 80.35 79.62 79.62 79.62 635.00 LCV 30.45 30.66 28.52 30.66 28.52 28.52 28.52 310.00 2A 34.58 40.42 33.24 40.42 33.24 33.24 33.24 745.00 3A 51.87 60.63 49.85 60.63 49.85 49.85 49.85 1025.00 MAV 78.35 90.89 70.99 90.89 70.99 70.99 70.99 1170.00

Alternative Road Toll Link Name XA AI IJ JK KL LH Rates Car 12.47 12.47 12.47 12.47 12.47 12.47 210.00 Mini Bus 24.73 24.73 24.73 24.73 24.73 24.73 330.00 Bus 69.82 69.82 69.82 69.82 69.82 69.82 540.00 LCV 28.59 28.59 28.59 28.59 28.59 28.59 330.00 2A 34.46 34.46 34.46 34.46 34.46 34.46 540.00 3A 51.68 51.68 51.68 51.68 51.68 51.68 870.00 MAV 72.68 72.68 72.68 72.68 72.68 72.68 870.00

The per Km cost variables were further worked out to estimate the total generalized cost on the project road and the alternate roads, and Cost Ratio (CR) was calculated for all types of vehicles, and using appropriate CR value, the %diversion is calculated. The Table 4.23 shows the summary of the 95 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

%Diversion observed on the basis of Cost Ratio.

Table 4.23: Summary of Cost Ratio Diversion for RC-2

Cost % Project Road Alternative Road Ratio Diversion VOC+VOT Toll Rate Total VOC+VOT Toll Rate Total PR/AR to PR Car 3289 205 3494 3105 210 3315 1.05 47.98 Mini 53.27 Bus 6061 310 6371 6159 330 6489 0.98 Bus 18460 635 19095 17385 540 17925 1.07 38.24 LCV 6803 310 7113 7119 330 7449 0.95 58.13 2A 8018 745 8763 8580 540 9120 0.96 57.03 3A 12028 1025 13053 12869 870 13739 0.95 59.00 MAV 17678 1170 18848 18097 870 18967 0.99 51.13 *as per Diversion equations

In the summary table, Cost Ratio is taken as travel cost on Project road (CR= PR/AR). This is to assess the diversion behaviour of traffic from the Alternate road to Project Road. In case of cars, as seen above, even if the cost implication shows higher cost of travel on alternate road to project road, there is a significant diversion observed as per the diversion equations.

Now, to assess the traffic diverted from this %Diversion, the potential divertible traffic is estimated from the valid OD pairs, on which this Route Choice is applicable. So, in order to assess the potential quantum of traffic flowing between the two extremes, the Traffic analysis zones were categorized into two across the extremes of the common nodes (X node and H node in this case). The areas considered have been summarized in Table 4.14. The total traffic diverted from the potential divertible traffic is shown in Table 4.24.

Table 4.24: Route Choice-2: Beawar to Pindwara Traffic Diversion to Vehicle Type % of Traffic Diversion Potential Diverted Traffic Project road Car 47.98 53 25 Mini Bus 53.27 4 2 Bus 38.24 36 14 MLCV 47.98 0 0 LCV 58.13 30 17 2A 57.03 30 17 3A 59.00 131 77 MAV 51.13 222 113 Total 503 265 PCU 1687 886

96 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.6.2.3 RC-3: Project road v/s NH-62 for Sojat to Desuri

The third route choice comparison has been established between the project road from Sojat to Desuri, which may have following two choices of commuting between the two extremes of the project road as follows:

e. Project road (ABCD) – Sojat to Desuri via Jojawar f. Alternate Road (AID) – Sojat to Desuri via Pali and Nadol

SH-67 link road between Desuri to Pali is a recently widened road which has attracted some traffic from the project road. Thus after the improvement on the project road would be observed, the traffic would return to project road from the alternate route. The extent of diversion is analyzed on the basis of Diversion model and the Road User Cost study equations. The speed characteristics assumed on the two routes have been estimated based on the total distance and the total travel time on routes as shown in Table 4.17.

The abstract of the route and the corresponding link characteristics’ comparison is shown in Table 4.25.

Table 4.25: Route Characteristic comparison for RC-3

Route Project Road Characteristics Link Name AB BC CD Road Section Sojat – Sojat Jojawar

97 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Sojat Road – – Road Jojawar Desuri Road Name SH-62 SH-62 SH-62 Link Length (Km) 10 43 35 Tolled (Y-Yes / N- N N Y No) Divided(1)/ 2 2 2 Undivided(2) Lanes 2L 2L 2L (1L/2L/2LP/4LP/6LP) Area (Urban-1 / 2 2 2 Rural-2) Road Condition Good Good Good Terrain Condition Plain Plain Plain Roughness (mm/Km) 2000 2000 2000 Rise and Fall (m/Km) 10 10 10

Route Alternate Road Characteristics (SH-67: Desuri – Pali – Sojat) Link Name AI IJ Road Section Sojat – Pali – Pali Desuri Road Name NH-62 SH-67 Link Length (Km) 40 70 Tolled (Y-Yes / N- Y Y No) Divided(1)/ 1 2 Undivided(2) Lanes 4L 2LP (1L/2L/2LP/4LP/6LP) Area (Urban-1 / 2 2 Rural-2) Road Condition Good Good Terrain Condition Plain Plain Roughness (mm/Km) 2000 2000 Rise and Fall (m/Km) 10 10 The above link and speed characteristics were utilized for estimating Vehicle Operating Cost (including Value of Time) per Km, VOC+VOT per Km, on the basis of RUCS equations, as given in Annexure 6.

98 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

The total divertible traffic is estimated based on the diversion equations in Table 4.15 and by plugging in the following input parameters:

x Vehicle Operating Cost (including Value of Time) – The link wise VOT+VOC is summarized in Table 4.15. x Adopted Speeds (as given in Table 4.17) x Toll rates – Toll rates have been worked out on the basis of applicable Toll Policy received from PWD office, as shown in Table 4.26.

Table 4.26: VOC+VOT as per Km as per RUCS & applicable Toll Rates

Project Road Alternate Road Toll Toll Link Name AB BC CD AI ID Rates Rates Car 13.82 13.82 13.82 130.00 12.47 13.62 105.00 Mini Bus 25.87 25.87 25.87 190.00 24.73 26.18 200.00 Bus 79.62 79.62 79.62 385.00 69.82 75.03 270.00 LCV 28.52 28.52 28.52 190.00 28.59 29.06 200.00 2A 33.24 33.24 33.24 385.00 34.46 36.04 300.00 3A 49.85 49.85 49.85 635.00 51.68 54.06 470.00 MAV 70.99 70.99 70.99 770.00 72.68 75.94 590.00

The per Km cost variables were further worked out to estimate the total generalized cost on the project road and the alternate roads, and Cost Ratio (CR) was calculated for all types of vehicles, and using appropriate CR value, the %diversion is calculated. The Table 4.27 shows the summary of the %Diversion observed on the basis of Cost Ratio.

Table 4.27: Summary of Cost Ratio Diversion for RC-3

Cost % Project Road Alternative Road Ratio Diversion VOC+VOT Toll Rate Total VOC+VOT Toll Rate Total PR/AR to PR Car 1216 130 1346 1452 105 1557 0.86 67.22 Mini 83.08 Bus 2277 190 2467 2822 200 3022 0.82 Bus 7007 385 7392 8045 270 8315 0.89 69.98 LCV 2510 190 2700 3178 200 3378 0.80 86.10 2A 2925 385 3310 3901 300 4201 0.79 88.18 3A 4387 635 5022 5851 470 6321 0.79 86.99 MAV 6247 770 7017 8223 590 8813 0.80 86.67 *as per Diversion equations

In the summary table, Cost Ratio is taken as travel cost on Project road (CR= PR/AR). This is to assess the diversion behavior of traffic from the Alternate road to Project Road. In case of cars, as seen above,

99 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

even if the cost implication shows higher cost of travel on alternate road to project road, there is a significant diversion observed as per the diversion equations.

Now, to assess the traffic diverted from this %Diversion, the potential divertible traffic is estimated from the valid OD pairs, on which this Route Choice is applicable. So, in order to assess the potential quantum of traffic flowing between the two extremes, the Traffic analysis zones were categorized into two across the extremes of the common nodes (A node and D node in this case). The areas considered have been summarized in Table 4.14. The total traffic diverted from the potential divertible traffic is shown in Table 4.28.

Table 4.28: Route Choice-3: Sojat to Desuri Traffic Diversion to Vehicle Type % of Traffic Diversion Potential Diverted Traffic Project road Car 67.22 21 14 Mini Bus 83.08 0 0 Bus 69.98 2 1 MLCV 86.10 2 2 LCV 86.10 5 4 2A 88.18 2 2 3A 86.99 1 1 MAV 86.67 2 2 Total 35 26 PCU 56 44

The diverted traffic assessed through this methodology shows that traffic has increased the existing traffic census manifold. However, diverted traffic cannot be neglected due to two major reasons as follows:

1. Neglecting the generated traffic after the improvement can cause failure of the pavement design adopted on the basis of mere existing traffic. Thus on proper assessment of the diverted traffic, suitable crust thickness is provided. 2. The existing traffic number forecasted for future would cause congestion due to insufficient capacity of the corridor and thus the improvement of the corridor would not serve the purpose to the road user.

Keeping in view the above two points, the total diverted traffic, on the basis of experience and previous such traffic studies, the effect of diversion is catered on the safer side and the effect of induced traffic is taken up to 5%. The table below summarizes the traffic after generated traffic is considered.

100 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Net effect of the diversion is as below:

TP-1 TP-2

Car 55 41 Mini Bus 2 2 Bus 15 14 MLCV 2 0 LCV 22 18 2A 24 22 3A 99 98 MAV 141 139

101 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Traffic Summary in Terms of Vehicles & PCU at Km 40 Categories Base Traffic Diverted Traffic AADT Induced 5% AADT ADT AADT Diverted Total traffic Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs 2 Wheeler 2,724 1,362 3,078 1,539 3,078 1,539 3,232 1,616 3 Wheeler 160 160 160 160 160 160 168 168 Car/Jeep/Van 638 638 721 721 55 55 776 776 815 815 Taxi 117 117 132 132 0 132 132 139 139 Mini LCV 166 166 209 209 2 2 211 211 221 221 Mini Bus 17 26 21 32 2 3 23 35 24 37 Private Bus 111 333 140 420 15 46 155 465 163 489 Govt. Bus 8 24 8 24 0 8 24 8 25 LCV 66 99 83 125 22 33 105 157 110 165 2-Axle 117 351 147 442 24 72 171 514 180 540 3-Axle 123 369 155 465 99 298 254 763 267 801 MAV (4-6) 23 104 29 130 141 634 170 765 178 803 OSV(More than 6) 1 5 1 6 1 6 1 6 HCM/EME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Agricultural Tractor 3 5 4 6 4 6 4 6 Agricultural Tractor Trailer 40 180 50 227 0 50 227 53 238 Ex. Car/Jeep 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ex. Bus 3 5 3 5 3 5 3 5 Ex. LCV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bi-Cycle 29 15 29 15 29 15 30 15 Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Animal-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hand-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Slow Moving Traffic 29 15 29 15 0 0 29 15 30 15 Toll Exempted Traffic 2,920 1,547 3,275 1,725 0 0 3,275 1,725 3,439 1,811 Tollable Traffic 1,427 2,411 1,698 2,933 360 1,143 2,058 4,075 2,161 4,279 6,090 Total Traffic 4,347 3,957 4,973 4,658 360 1,143 5,333 5,800 5,600

102 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Traffic Summary in Terms of Vehicles & PCU at Km 65 Categories Base Traffic Diverted Traffic AADT Induced 5% AADT ADT AADT Diverted Total traffic Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs 2 Wheeler 1,085 543 1,226 613 1,226 613 1,287 644 3 Wheeler 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Car/Jeep/Van 143 143 162 162 55 55 217 217 228 228 Taxi 58 58 66 66 0 0 66 66 69 69 Mini LCV 72 72 91 91 2 3 92 139 97 146 Mini Bus 1 2 1 2 2 3 3 5 3 5 Private Bus 68 204 86 257 15 46 101 303 106 318 Govt. Bus 4 12 4 12 0 0 4 12 4 13 LCV 4 6 5 8 22 33 27 40 28 42 2-Axle 35 105 44 132 24 72 68 204 71 214 3-Axle 93 279 117 352 99 298 216 649 227 682 MAV (4-6) 8 36 10 45 141 634 151 680 159 714 OSV(More than 6) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HCM/EME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Agricultural Tractor 22 33 28 42 28 42 29 44 Agricultural Tractor Trailer 14 63 18 79 0 18 79 19 83 Ex. Car/Jeep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Bus 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 Ex. LCV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bi-Cycle 29 15 29 15 29 15 30 15 Cycle-Rickshaw 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Animal-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hand-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Slow Moving Traffic 30 17 30 17 0 0 30 17 32 17 Toll Exempted Traffic 1,146 602 1,293 681 0 0 1,293 682 1,357 715 Tollable Traffic 500 980 603 1,205 360 1,143 963 2,394 1,011 2,465 Total Traffic 1,646 1,581 1,896 1,886 360 1,143 2,256 3,076 2,369 3,179

103 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Traffic Summary in Terms of Vehicles & PCU at Km 95 Categories Base Traffic Diverted Traffic AADT Induced 5% AADT ADT AADT Diverted Total traffic Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs 2 Wheeler 793 397 896 448 896 448 941 470 3 Wheeler 124 124 124 124 124 124 130 130 Car/Jeep/Van 116 116 131 131 55 55 187 187 196 196 Taxi 68 68 77 77 0 0 77 77 81 81 Mini LCV 36 36 45 45 2 3 47 71 49 74 Mini Bus 1 2 1 2 2 3 3 5 3 5 Private Bus 22 66 28 83 15 46 43 129 45 135 Govt. Bus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LCV 4 6 5 8 22 33 27 40 28 42 2-Axle 5 15 6 19 24 72 30 91 32 95 3-Axle 14 42 18 53 99 298 117 351 123 368 MAV (4-6) 0 0 0 0 141 634 141 634 148 666 OSV(More than 6) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HCM/EME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Agricultural Tractor 7 11 9 13 9 13 9 14 Agricultural Tractor Trailer 9 41 11 51 11 51 12 54 Ex. Car/Jeep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Bus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. LCV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bi-Cycle 36 18 36 18 36 18 38 19 Cycle-Rickshaw 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Animal-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hand-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Slow Moving Traffic 37 20 37 20 0 0 37 20 39 21 Toll Exempted Traffic 961 551 1,066 605 0 0 1,066 605 1,119 636 Tollable Traffic 275 391 323 469 360 1,143 683 1,635 717 1,692 Total Traffic 1,236 942 1,388 1,074 360 1,143 1,749 2,240 1,836 2,327

104 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Traffic Summary in Terms of Vehicles & PCU at Km 117 Categories Base Traffic Diverted Traffic AADT Induced 5% AADT ADT AADT Diverted Total traffic Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs 2 Wheeler 877 439 991 496 991 496 1,041 520 3 Wheeler 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 Car/Jeep/Van 132 132 149 149 55 55 205 205 215 215 Taxi 67 67 76 76 0 0 76 76 79 79 Mini LCV 35 35 44 44 2 2 46 46 48 48 Mini Bus 1 2 1 2 2 3 3 5 3 5 Private Bus 37 111 47 140 15 46 62 186 65 195 Govt. Bus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LCV 4 6 5 8 22 33 27 40 28 42 2-Axle 3 9 4 11 24 72 28 83 29 87 3-Axle 1 3 1 4 99 298 101 302 106 317 MAV (4-6) 0 0 0 0 141 634 141 634 148 666 OSV(More than 6) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HCM/EME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Agricultural Tractor 7 11 9 13 9 13 9 14 Agricultural Tractor Trailer 8 36 10 45 10 45 11 48 Ex. Car/Jeep 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Ex. Bus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. LCV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bi-Cycle 9 5 9 5 9 5 9 5 Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Animal-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hand-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Slow Moving Traffic 9 5 9 5 0 0 9 5 9 5 Toll Exempted Traffic 908 469 1,024 528 0 0 1,024 528 1,075 555 Tollable Traffic 288 401 337 479 360 1,143 697 1,621 732 1,702 Total Traffic 1,196 869 1,361 1,007 360 1,143 1,721 2,150 1,807 2,257

105 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Traffic Summary in Terms of Vehicles & PCU at Km 159 Categories Base Traffic Diverted Traffic AADT Induced 5% AADT ADT AADT Diverted Total traffic Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs 2 Wheeler 1,562 781 1,765 883 1,765 883 1,853 927 3 Wheeler 57 57 57 57 57 57 60 60 Car/Jeep/Van 279 279 315 315 41 41 356 356 374 374 Taxi 122 122 138 138 0 138 138 145 145 Mini LCV 36 36 45 45 0 0 45 68 48 48 Mini Bus 42 63 53 79 2 3 55 82 58 86 Private Bus 40 120 50 151 14 42 65 194 68 203 Govt. Bus 12 36 12 36 0 12 36 13 38 LCV 9 14 11 17 18 27 29 44 30 46 2-Axle 9 27 11 34 22 66 33 100 35 105 3-Axle 4 12 5 15 98 295 103 310 108 325 MAV (4-6) 0 0 0 0 139 627 139 627 146 658 OSV(More than 6) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HCM/EME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Agricultural Tractor 13 20 16 25 16 25 17 26 Agricultural Tractor Trailer 20 90 25 113 0 25 113 26 119 Ex. Car/Jeep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Bus 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 2 Ex. LCV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bi-Cycle 146 73 146 73 146 73 153 77 Cycle-Rickshaw 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 Animal-Drawn 2 16 2 16 2 8 2 8 Hand-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Slow Moving Traffic 150 93 150 93 0 0 150 85 158 98 Toll Exempted Traffic 1,783 952 1,989 1,059 0 0 1,989 1,052 2,089 2,146 Tollable Traffic 573 799 667 945 334 1,100 1,001 2,067 1,051 2,146 Total Traffic 2,356 1,751 2,656 2,003 334 1,100 2,990 3,119 3,140 3,258

106 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Traffic Summary in Terms of Vehicles & PCU at Km 174 Categories Base Traffic Diverted Traffic AADT Induced 5% AADT ADT AADT Diverted Total traffic Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs 2 Wheeler 1,326 663 1,498 749 1,498 749 1,573 787 3 Wheeler 77 77 77 77 77 77 81 81 Car/Jeep/Van 151 151 171 171 41 41 212 212 222 222 Taxi 107 107 121 121 0 0 121 121 127 127 Mini LCV 78 78 98 98 0 0 98 147 103 103 Mini Bus 34 51 43 64 2 3 45 67 47 70 Private Bus 9 27 11 34 14 42 25 76 27 80 Govt. Bus 6 18 6 18 0 0 6 18 6 19 LCV 13 20 16 25 18 27 34 51 36 54 2-Axle 27 81 34 102 22 66 56 168 59 176 3-Axle 34 102 43 129 98 295 141 423 148 444 MAV (4-6) 1 5 1 6 139 627 141 632 148 664 OSV(More than 6) 1 5 1 6 0 1 6 1 6 HCM/EME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Agricultural Tractor 66 99 83 125 0 83 125 87 131 Agricultural Tractor Trailer 32 144 40 181 0 40 181 42 191 Ex. Car/Jeep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Bus 2 3 2 3 2 6 2 3 Ex. LCV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bi-Cycle 108 54 108 54 108 54 113 57 Cycle-Rickshaw 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Animal-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hand-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 Slow Moving Traffic 109 56 109 56 0 0 109 56 114 118 Toll Exempted Traffic 1,580 898 1,770 1,010 0 0 1,770 1,013 1,858 1,119 Tollable Traffic 493 788 586 954 334 1,100 920 2,103 966 2,156 Total Traffic 2,073 1,686 2,356 1,964 334 1,100 2,690 3,116 2,824 3,276

107 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Traffic Summary in Terms of Vehicles & PCU at Km 201 Categories Base Traffic Diverted Traffic AADT Induced 5% AADT ADT AADT Diverted Total traffic Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs Vehicles PCUs 2 Wheeler 1,271 636 1,436 718 1,436 718 1,508 754 3 Wheeler 249 249 249 249 249 249 261 261 Car/Jeep/Van 91 91 103 103 41 41 144 144 151 151 Taxi 184 184 208 208 0 0 208 208 218 218 Mini LCV 29 29 37 37 0 0 37 55 38 38 Mini Bus 5 8 6 9 2 3 8 12 9 13 Private Bus 10 30 13 38 14 42 27 80 28 84 Govt. Bus 6 18 6 18 0 0 6 18 6 19 LCV 6 9 8 11 18 27 25 38 26 40 2-Axle 12 36 15 45 22 66 37 111 39 116 3-Axle 99 297 125 374 98 295 223 669 234 702 MAV (4-6) 1 5 1 6 139 627 141 632 148 664 OSV(More than 6) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HCM/EME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Agricultural Tractor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Agricultural Tractor Trailer 22 99 28 125 0 28 125 29 131 Ex. Car/Jeep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Bus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. LCV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ex. Truck 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bi-Cycle 24 12 24 12 24 12 25 13 Cycle-Rickshaw 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Animal-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hand-Drawn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Slow Moving Traffic 24 12 24 12 0 0 24 12 25 13 Toll Exempted Traffic 1,544 897 1,709 979 0 0 1,709 979 1,795 1,028 Tollable Traffic 465 805 549 974 334 1,100 883 2,092 927 2,177 Total Traffic 2,009 1,702 2,258 1,953 334 1,100 2,592 3,071 2,722 3,205

108 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.7 TRAFFIC ESTIMATION AND FORECAST

4.7.1 General

As the project road is executed on a BOT basis, an estimation of the traffic expected to use the tolled highway and its future growth are important elements to assess the project’s economics as they are generally the main/sole source of revenue for the project. This chapter details various aspects of the project road traffic and its growth potential.

4.7.2 Project Road Traffic

The traffic that is likely to use the project road was estimated on the basis of the traffic and travel characteristics data gathered through primary as well as secondary surveys. The traffic on the project road would normally consist of the following components

x Normal Traffic x Diverted Traffic x Induced/New Generated Traffic

4.7.2.1 Normal Traffic

Normal traffic is the traffic which is plying on the project road, which has been assessed on the basis of the traffic surveys carried out and described in section 3.4, and its projected growth.

4.7.2.2 Diverted Traffic

Diverted traffic is generally dictated by the presence of an alternative route at a cheaper generalized cost.

4.7.2.3 Induced Traffic

Induced/new generated traffic is the one which would be generated, over and above normal growth, because of lowering of transport costs or new developments in the immediate influence area of the project road.

4.7.3 Traffic Projections Methodology

As explained above in the previous section, the traffic studies give an idea of the base year traffic on the project stretch; so the next step is to forecast the traffic for future estimation.

109 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

The forecast has been done for a period of 30 years i.e. from 2015-16 to 2045-2046. The 2 years of Bidding and construction from present year have been considered separately.

Traffic forecast has been done by employing the “Elasticity of Transport Demand” method, which is the best practice worldwide and thus a preferred technique in India. This method has been recommended by Indian Roads Congress —IRC: 108: Guidelines for Traffic Prediction on Rural Highway (IRC 1996). This method involves:

x Regression of past traffic growth on the project stretch or vehicle registration in the project state with socio-economic indicators such as population, state income (NSDP) and per capita income. x Analysing correlation of traffic growth of each mode (car, 2-wheeler, bus & trucks) to various socio-economic indicators. This will help in arriving at the economic variable and the corresponding elasticity of demand for each type of vehicle to be considered for forecast. x The estimated elasticity is moderated based on comparisons with the elasticity suggested in the Road Development Plan: 2021 (IRC 2001, MORTH) and other socio- economic factors expected to shape the traffic in future.

As the project stretch does not entertain the traffic of just one state only but it caters traffic of various states, a weighted average of the economic variables of the states in the Project Influence Area (PIA) is considered, to arrive at final growth rates.

Regression analysis has been done using past trends on vehicle registration and socio- economic indicators for the period 2004-09, to estimate elasticity for each vehicle type. The elasticity values estimated through regression analysis were then compared with those suggested in the “Road Development Plan: 2021”, IRC and best combination of elasticities have been recommended for deriving traffic growth rates and traffic forecasts. The final traffic has then been estimated.

The subsequent sections explain the traffic forecast on the project stretch in detail.

4.7.4 Project Influence Area (PIA)

Delineating the Project Influence Area is important as socio-economic indicators in the area will influence the traffic movement on the project stretch. The project influence area has been assessed based on the O-D data. The following Table 4.29 presents the regional influence factors for vehicles plying on the project stretch.

110 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.29: Trip Contributions Observed during Traffic surveys along the Project stretch (in Percentage)

Mini Mini 2- 3- Region/Modes Cars Bus LCV MAV Bus LCV Axle Axle Rajasthan 98.7 100.0 96.2 99.2 97.3 99.4 96.9 90.0 Gujarat 0.8 0.0 2.9 0.3 2.7 0.4 2.4 0.0 Maharashtra 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 5.0 Rest of India 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.3 5.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 The above table shows that Rajasthan constitutes majority of traffic across all the modes approximately due to regional location of project road in state of Rajasthan. The remaining surrounding states of Gujarat, Maharashtra, Punjab, Haryana, and Delhi also influence traffic on project corridor, with the share of 2%; while rest of the traffic is contributed by Rest of India. All the above data has been analyzed to forecast the future traffic in the following sections.

4.7.5 Socio-Economic Indicators

As seen in the previous section, the traffic on the project road is majorly from Rajasthan and has an interaction with other states like Gujarat, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana, HP, J&K, Delhi, which are neighboring states of Rajasthan and thus have an influence on project road. Thus the regression analysis of the economic indicators of these states with the vehicle registration in the respective state was carried out to establish the elasticity of growth. The past growth of Socio-Economic Indicators from 2004-2011 (Net State Domestic Product, Population and Per Capita Income) and vehicle registrations, by vehicle type, of these states are summarized in the following Table 4.30:

Table 4.30: Socio Economic Indicators and Vehicle Registration Data

Region/ 2- 3- Car/Jeep Buses Trucks Population PCI NSDP GDP Modes wheelers wheelers Rajasthan 11.67% 9.20% 12.42% 5.19% 10.66% 1.96% 6.51% 8.36% 8.48% Gujarat 8.65% 9.08% 10.83% 3.41% 8.35% 1.77% 8.49% 10.06% 8.48% Maharashtra 9.02% 3.58% 10.39% 9.05% 9.45% 1.87% 7.70% 9.28% 8.48% Rest of India 9.89% 8.70% 10.93% 9.02% 9.4% 1.57% 6.60% 8.48% Source: Economic Statistics of India

111 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

From above data, it can be seen that the vehicle registration in the state has seen a steady growth across modes and this data has been considered for estimating the travel demand elasticities for the respective states. All the socio economic indicators have seen a significant growth during 2004-2011.

4.7.6 Elasticity Value of Project corridor

Elasticity estimation forms the very base of traffic forecasting. The elasticity of each type of vehicle defining the relationship and degree of correlation with various economic indicators is estimated using regression analysis. Past growth data for the period of 2004 to 2011 was used for this analysis. Usually passenger traffic is a function of population and per capita income, while the freight and commercial traffic is governed by state income growth. The elasticity estimated with respect to various socio-economic indicators through regression analysis is given in the Table 4.31 below:

Table 4.31: Elasticity’s of various modes derived through regression analysis

Vehicle Category Independent Variable R square Elasticity Coeff.

PCI 0.9826 1.7205 2-wheelers Population 0.9992 5.6854 PCI 0.9818 1.371 3-wheelers Population 0.9977 4.5336 PCI 0.9838 1.8254 Car Population 0.9996 6.0923 PCI 0.9842 0.7928 Bus Population 0.9888 2.6041 NSDP 0.9798 1.2496 Trucks GDP 0.9949 1.2451 It is evident from the above table that the best-fit economic variables for car and bus traffic growth are population and PCI. The best fit economic indicator for all goods traffic is the state income, which is a function of the economic activity in the concerned state.

While the regression analysis gives elasticity figures, there is a need for moderation based on comparison with other studies and developments in socio-economic conditions expected in future that will make movement of commercial vehicles easier within the state. The elasticities for different vehicle categories have been moderated based on future economic prospects of the project influence area and the likely future shift among the vehicle categories, like, the probable shift of vehicle ownership from 2-axle trucks to MAV and 2/3

112 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

wheeler market to car have been taken into account while moderating the elasticity values. This is considered necessary because as the purchasing power increases there will be a shift from low cost vehicle to high speed, more expensive and better comfortable vehicles.

Further, with the road improvement and realization of economics of scale, goods operators will tend to transfer from 2-axle trucks to Multi-Axle vehicles. These market driven forces have been realistically considered in the elasticity moderations.

In order to moderate the transport demand elasticity, as discussed above, the Consultants have referred the “Road Development Plan: Vision 2021” prepared by IRC in 2001. This document provides the vision for the next 20 years for development and maintenance of all categories of roads i.e. National Highways, State Highways, Major District Roads and Rural Roads. It focuses on research and development, mobilization of resources, capacity building and human resources development, quality system, environment and energy considerations for the highway sector and highway safety and serves as a valuable guide to the Centre and the State Governments for planning purpose.

The following Table 4.32 presents the Comparison of elasticity values suggested by the “Road Development Plan: Vision 2021” for projecting traffic growth trends at a national level.

Table 4.32: Comparison of Elasticity

Cars Buses Trucks

Elasticity as per calculation(weighted elasticity) 1.807 0.783 1.24 Elasticity as per SP-19 2.00 1.60 2.00 Elasticity as per vision 2021 (MoRT&H) 1.60 1.30 1.40

4.7.7 Adopted Elasticity for different Scenarios

As per the best suitable traffic scenario, Weighted Average Elasticity values are adopted and presented in Table 4.33 below:

Table 4.33: Adopted elasticity

Duration Mode Up to 2016- 2021- 2026- 2031- 2036- 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2-Wheeler 1.434 1.290 1.161 1.045 0.941 0.847

113 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Duration Mode Up to 2016- 2021- 2026- 2031- 2036- 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Auto Passengers 1.147 1.032 0.929 0.836 0.752 0.677 Cars 1.512 1.361 1.225 1.102 0.992 0.893 Mini Bus 0.664 0.598 0.538 0.484 0.436 0.392 Bus 0.654 0.589 0.530 0.477 0.429 0.386 Mini LCV 1.035 0.932 0.838 0.755 0.679 0.611 LCV 1.027 0.925 0.832 0.749 0.674 0.607 2-Axle 1.024 0.921 0.829 0.746 0.672 0.605 3-Axle 1.000 0.900 0.810 0.729 0.656 0.590 MAV 1.000 0.900 0.810 0.729 0.656 0.590 Average 5.516 5.817 4.851 4.021 3.308 2.698

4.7.8 Final Traffic Growth Rates

Based on the weighted average elasticity values and the projected economic/demographic indicators, the future average annual compound traffic growth rates by vehicle type have been estimated & presented in the following Table 4.34.

Table 4.34: Final Traffic Growth rates

Duration Mode 2012 to 2017 to 2022 to 2027 to 2032 to 2037 to 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 2042 2-Wheeler 7.9% 7.1% 6.4% 5.7% 5.2% 4.7% Auto Passengers 6.3% 5.7% 5.1% 4.6% 4.1% 3.7% Cars 8.3% 7.5% 6.7% 6.1% 5.5% 4.9% Mini Bus 3.7% 3.3% 3.0% 2.7% 2.4% 2.2% Bus 3.6% 3.2% 2.9% 2.6% 2.4% 2.1% Tractor 6.2% 5.6% 5.0% 4.5% 4.1% 3.7% Mini LCV 6.2% 5.6% 5.0% 4.5% 4.1% 3.7% LCV 6.2% 5.5% 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% 3.6% 2-Axle 1.0% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 3-Axle 6.0% 5.4% 4.9% 4.4% 3.9% 3.5% MAV 6.0% 5.4% 4.9% 4.4% 3.9% 3.5% Average 5.6% 5.0% 4.5% 4.1% 3.7% 3.3%

114 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4.7.9 Traffic Projections

4.7.9.1 Projections of Normal Traffic (with actual growth rates)

The total daily traffic is forecasted for the period up to year 2046 based upon suitable growth rates (from Economic Indicators). The total projected tollable traffic at each survey location is shown in Table 4.35 below.

4.7.9.2 Projections of Traffic including Diverted Traffic (Estimated Growth rates)

The total daily traffic is also forecasted for the period up to year 2046 based upon suitable growth rates (from Economic Indicators), which includes effect of diversion into account. The extent of diversion is only applicable after the construction of the new facility is improved and Toll operations have resumed. The total projected tollable traffic at each survey location is shown in Table 4.36 below.

4.7.9.3 Projections of Normal Traffic excluding Diverted Traffic (5% growth)

The total daily traffic excluding

. traffic is forecasted taking 5% growth rate. Such an analysis is useful for understanding the financial feasibility of the project. And it can be compared that the projections keep the traffic on the conservative side, as shown in Table 4.37 below.

4.7.9.4 Projections of Traffic including Diverted Traffic (5% growth)

The total daily traffic including diverted traffic is forecasted taking 5% growth rate. Such an analysis is useful for understanding the financial feasibility of the project. And it can be compared that the projections keep the traffic on the conservative side, as shown in Table 4.38 below.

115 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.35: Traffic Projections Normal Traffic @ Growth Rates assessed on Economic indicators

Location @ Km 40+000 Location @ Km65+000 Location @ Km 95+000 Location @ Km 117+000 Location @ Km 159+000 Location @ Km 174+000 Location @ Km 201+000 Averag Total Total Total Total Total Average e Tollabl Tollabl Tollabl Total Tollab Tollabl Traffic Traffic e Total e Total e Total Total Tollable Total le Total e Total Observed Observ Vehicl Vehicle Total Vehicl Vehicl Total Vehicl Vehicl Total Tollable Total Total Vehicle Vehicl Total Vehicl Vehicl Total Vehicl Vehicl Total PCU ed Year es PCU s PCU es PCU es PCU es PCU es PCU Vehicles PCU Vehicles PCU s PCU es PCU es PCU es PCU es PCU es PCU Base Year(2014) 1698 2933 4973 4658 603 1205 1896 1886 323 469 1388 1074 337 479 1361 1007 667 945 2656 2003 586 954 2356 1964 549 974 2258 1953 2412 2078 2015 1809 3109 5248 4920 641 1276 1999 1990 345 499 1464 1134 360 509 1436 1063 713 1004 2802 2116 625 1013 2483 2074 587 1037 2382 2065 2545 2195 2016 1935 3307 5545 5208 685 1355 2110 2105 371 533 1546 1200 387 543 1516 1125 765 1071 2959 2239 669 1080 2620 2193 630 1107 2515 2187 2687 2322 2017 2070 3518 5861 5515 731 1439 2228 2227 399 569 1633 1270 416 579 1601 1190 822 1143 3125 2369 716 1151 2764 2320 677 1183 2656 2316 2838 2458 2018 2215 3744 6196 5841 781 1529 2353 2356 429 609 1724 1344 447 618 1692 1260 883 1221 3301 2507 767 1227 2917 2454 727 1264 2805 2454 2998 2602 2019 2371 3986 6551 6187 835 1624 2485 2493 461 651 1822 1423 481 660 1787 1334 949 1303 3488 2654 821 1308 3080 2597 782 1350 2963 2600 3168 2756 2020 2540 4245 6928 6556 892 1726 2624 2638 496 696 1924 1507 517 704 1889 1412 1020 1392 3686 2811 880 1395 3251 2748 840 1443 3131 2755 3348 2918 2021 2690 4475 7298 6902 943 1817 2762 2774 527 736 2027 1588 549 745 1990 1488 1084 1472 3883 2961 932 1473 3422 2894 893 1526 3298 2904 3526 3073 2022 2850 4719 7689 7267 997 1912 2907 2918 561 779 2136 1673 584 787 2097 1567 1152 1556 4091 3120 988 1555 3602 3047 948 1614 3474 3061 3714 3236 2023 3021 4977 8101 7653 1055 2013 3060 3069 596 825 2250 1764 621 832 2209 1652 1224 1646 4310 3288 1047 1642 3792 3209 1008 1707 3659 3226 3912 3409 2024 3202 5251 8536 8060 1116 2120 3222 3228 634 873 2370 1859 660 880 2328 1741 1301 1741 4542 3465 1110 1734 3993 3379 1071 1806 3855 3401 4121 3590 2025 3394 5540 8996 8490 1181 2232 3392 3396 675 924 2498 1960 702 931 2453 1835 1384 1842 4786 3653 1178 1832 4204 3559 1138 1910 4062 3585 4341 3782 2026 3564 5794 9445 8891 1237 2330 3559 3553 710 969 2624 2056 739 976 2578 1924 1456 1931 5029 3832 1237 1918 4414 3731 1198 2002 4267 3760 4560 3964 2027 3742 6060 9918 9312 1297 2433 3735 3716 748 1017 2758 2158 778 1023 2709 2019 1533 2024 5284 4020 1299 2008 4635 3912 1260 2099 4483 3945 4789 4155 2028 3930 6339 10414 9753 1360 2541 3919 3888 787 1067 2898 2265 819 1072 2846 2118 1613 2122 5552 4218 1364 2102 4868 4102 1326 2200 4710 4138 5030 4355 2029 4128 6631 10936 10217 1426 2653 4113 4068 829 1119 3045 2377 863 1124 2991 2222 1699 2225 5835 4426 1433 2201 5112 4300 1395 2306 4949 4341 5283 4565 2030 4336 6938 11485 10703 1495 2771 4317 4257 873 1174 3200 2495 908 1179 3143 2332 1789 2334 6131 4645 1505 2305 5368 4509 1469 2418 5200 4555 5549 4785 2031 4516 7203 12022 11156 1554 2872 4518 4432 911 1222 3354 2609 948 1226 3295 2436 1866 2428 6426 4854 1568 2394 5624 4709 1532 2514 5449 4758 5812 4994 2032 4704 7478 12585 11629 1617 2978 4728 4616 951 1271 3516 2728 989 1275 3453 2546 1947 2525 6735 5073 1633 2488 5892 4918 1598 2614 5711 4970 6089 5211 2033 4899 7764 13175 12123 1681 3087 4948 4807 992 1323 3686 2853 1032 1326 3620 2661 2032 2627 7059 5302 1701 2585 6173 5137 1667 2718 5986 5193 6378 5439 2034 5104 8062 13793 12638 1749 3200 5179 5006 1036 1377 3864 2983 1078 1379 3794 2781 2121 2733 7399 5542 1772 2686 6467 5365 1739 2827 6274 5425 6682 5677 2035 5317 8372 14441 13177 1819 3318 5421 5214 1081 1433 4051 3119 1125 1435 3977 2907 2214 2844 7756 5793 1846 2791 6776 5605 1814 2940 6576 5668 7000 5926 2036 5498 8635 15078 13680 1879 3418 5660 5409 1120 1481 4238 3251 1165 1482 4160 3027 2292 2938 8112 6035 1909 2880 7086 5834 1878 3036 6877 5900 7316 6162 2037 5685 8906 15744 14204 1940 3521 5911 5611 1160 1530 4434 3389 1206 1531 4351 3153 2374 3035 8484 6287 1974 2972 7410 6074 1944 3135 7194 6142 7647 6409 2038 5879 9186 16441 14749 2004 3627 6173 5822 1201 1581 4639 3533 1249 1581 4551 3285 2458 3135 8874 6550 2042 3067 7749 6324 2012 3238 7524 6395 7993 6665 2039 6080 9476 17170 15316 2070 3736 6447 6041 1244 1634 4853 3683 1294 1634 4761 3422 2546 3239 9283 6824 2112 3165 8104 6585 2083 3343 7871 6659 8356 6933 2040 6288 9775 17932 15907 2138 3849 6734 6269 1288 1688 5078 3840 1340 1688 4980 3566 2636 3347 9710 7111 2184 3267 8476 6858 2156 3453 8234 6934 8735 7212 2041 6503 10084 18730 16523 2208 3965 7035 6506 1334 1745 5314 4005 1388 1744 5210 3716 2731 3458 10158 7411 2259 3372 8865 7142 2232 3566 8614 7222 9132 7503 2042 6726 10403 19564 17164 2281 4085 7349 6753 1382 1803 5561 4176 1437 1802 5451 3872 2828 3574 10627 7724 2336 3480 9273 7440 2311 3683 9012 7521 9548 7807 2043 6957 10733 20437 17832 2356 4209 7677 7011 1432 1864 5819 4355 1489 1861 5703 4036 2930 3693 11118 8050 2416 3593 9700 7750 2393 3804 9428 7834 9983 8124 2044 7196 11074 21350 18528 2434 4337 8021 7278 1483 1926 6090 4542 1542 1923 5967 4206 3035 3817 11633 8392 2500 3708 10147 8073 2478 3929 9865 8161 10439 8454 2045 7444 11426 22306 19253 2515 4469 8381 7557 1536 1991 6373 4738 1598 1988 6244 4385 3143 3945 12172 8749 2586 3828 10616 8411 2565 4058 10322 8502 10916 8799 2046 7701 11790 23305 20008 2598 4605 8758 7848 1591 2058 6670 4942 1655 2054 6534 4571 3256 4077 12736 9121 2675 3952 11107 8764 2656 4192 10801 8857 11416 9159

Volume – I: Main Report 116 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.36: Traffic Projections Normal + Diverted Traffic @ Growth Rates assessed on Economic indicators

Location @ Km 40+000 Location @ Km65+000 Location @ Km 95+000 Location @ Km 117+000 Location @ Km 159+000 Location @ Km 174+000 Location @ Km 201+000 Total Average Average Total Tollab Total Total Total Total Total Traffic Traffic Tollable Total le Total Tollable Total Tota Tollable Total Tota Tollable Total Tollable Total Tollable Total Observe Observe Vehicle Vehicle Total Vehicl Vehicle Total Vehicle Vehicl l Vehicle Vehicl l Vehicle Vehicl Total Vehicle Vehicl Total Vehicle Vehicl Total d d PCU Year s PCU s PCU es PCU s PCU s PCU es PCU s PCU es PCU s PCU es PCU s PCU es PCU s PCU es PCU Base Year(2014 ) 2161 4279 5600 6090 1011 2465 2369 3179 717 1692 1836 2327 732 1702 1807 2257 1051 2146 3140 3258 966 2156 2824 3217 927 2177 2722 3205 2900 3362 2015 2299 4531 5910 6432 1073 2606 2498 3356 762 1790 1937 2457 778 1800 1907 2383 1119 2273 3313 3440 1027 2283 2978 3396 987 2307 2871 3387 3059 3550 2016 2455 4813 6246 6809 1143 2763 2639 3551 813 1900 2047 2600 830 1910 2016 2521 1196 2415 3499 3640 1095 2423 3143 3593 1055 2452 3033 3586 3232 3757 2017 2623 5113 6603 7210 1217 2930 2789 3757 868 2017 2164 2752 886 2027 2131 2669 1279 2566 3698 3852 1168 2573 3319 3801 1127 2607 3205 3797 3415 3977 2018 2803 5434 6982 7635 1297 3107 2947 3976 927 2141 2287 2914 946 2151 2253 2825 1368 2727 3908 4078 1246 2733 3505 4022 1205 2772 3387 4022 3610 4210 2019 2996 5776 7384 8087 1382 3296 3114 4208 990 2274 2418 3085 1010 2283 2382 2991 1464 2899 4130 4317 1330 2903 3701 4257 1289 2948 3579 4260 3816 4458 2020 3203 6141 7811 8568 1473 3497 3292 4454 1057 2415 2557 3267 1079 2424 2520 3167 1567 3082 4366 4572 1420 3085 3910 4506 1378 3135 3783 4513 4034 4721 2021 3389 6466 8227 9014 1554 3675 3464 4680 1118 2540 2693 3435 1141 2549 2654 3329 1659 3245 4598 4809 1500 3246 4115 4738 1458 3302 3984 4749 4248 4965 2022 3586 6810 8666 9485 1640 3862 3646 4918 1182 2673 2835 3612 1206 2681 2795 3500 1757 3417 4843 5059 1585 3416 4330 4983 1544 3478 4195 4997 4473 5222 2023 3795 7172 9130 9982 1731 4060 3837 5169 1250 2812 2986 3798 1276 2820 2943 3680 1861 3599 5102 5324 1675 3595 4558 5240 1634 3663 4418 5258 4710 5493 2024 4018 7556 9619 10505 1827 4268 4038 5432 1322 2959 3145 3994 1349 2967 3100 3870 1971 3791 5374 5602 1771 3784 4798 5512 1730 3859 4653 5534 4961 5778 2025 4254 7961 10135 11058 1929 4487 4251 5710 1398 3114 3312 4201 1427 3121 3266 4070 2089 3994 5662 5896 1872 3984 5050 5798 1831 4066 4901 5824 5225 6079 2026 4461 8315 10637 11567 2019 4679 4456 5962 1465 3250 3475 4391 1496 3256 3426 4252 2192 4172 5944 6168 1961 4158 5298 6063 1921 4247 5144 6093 5483 6357 2027 4680 8686 11164 12101 2112 4879 4672 6226 1535 3392 3646 4590 1568 3398 3595 4444 2301 4358 6240 6454 2055 4341 5558 6340 2015 4436 5399 6375 5753 6647 2028 4910 9075 11718 12661 2211 5087 4898 6502 1609 3540 3825 4798 1643 3545 3772 4644 2415 4553 6551 6754 2153 4532 5832 6631 2113 4634 5667 6670 6037 6951 2029 5151 9482 12300 13247 2314 5305 5136 6791 1687 3695 4014 5016 1723 3700 3958 4853 2535 4757 6878 7068 2256 4731 6119 6936 2217 4841 5948 6979 6336 7270 2030 5405 9909 12911 13862 2422 5533 5385 7093 1769 3857 4212 5244 1806 3861 4153 5072 2662 4971 7222 7397 2365 4940 6420 7255 2326 5058 6244 7302 6650 7604 2031 5625 10276 13506 14427 2515 5729 5626 7367 1839 3996 4405 5453 1878 4000 4342 5271 2771 5154 7559 7702 2458 5119 6717 7550 2420 5245 6533 7601 6955 7910 2032 5853 10657 14129 15016 2612 5932 5879 7652 1913 4141 4606 5670 1953 4144 4540 5479 2885 5345 7912 8020 2555 5306 7027 7858 2518 5438 6837 7912 7276 8230 2033 6092 11054 14781 15630 2713 6143 6143 7948 1989 4291 4818 5897 2032 4294 4748 5695 3004 5544 8283 8352 2657 5499 7352 8179 2620 5639 7155 8237 7611 8563 2034 6341 11466 15464 16271 2818 6361 6420 8257 2069 4446 5039 6133 2113 4449 4965 5921 3128 5750 8671 8699 2762 5700 7692 8513 2727 5848 7489 8576 7963 8910 2035 6600 11894 16180 16939 2927 6587 6709 8578 2152 4608 5270 6378 2198 4610 5193 6155 3257 5964 9077 9061 2872 5908 8048 8862 2838 6065 7838 8929 8331 9272 2036 6820 12256 16879 17554 3020 6778 6990 8869 2223 4745 5497 6604 2270 4746 5415 6369 3367 6145 9478 9397 2965 6084 8400 9186 2932 6248 8182 9256 8691 9605 2037 7047 12630 17609 18193 3115 6975 7284 9170 2295 4885 5733 6837 2344 4886 5646 6590 3481 6332 9897 9746 3061 6266 8768 9523 3029 6437 8542 9595 9069 9951 2038 7283 13016 18373 18856 3214 7178 7592 9483 2371 5031 5980 7080 2421 5031 5888 6820 3598 6525 10335 10110 3161 6453 9153 9873 3130 6632 8918 9948 9463 10310 2039 7526 13414 19171 19547 3316 7388 7912 9808 2449 5180 6239 7332 2501 5180 6141 7058 3720 6724 10793 10488 3264 6647 9556 10238 3234 6834 9311 10315 9875 10684 2040 7779 13825 20005 20264 3421 7603 8248 10144 2529 5334 6509 7594 2583 5334 6406 7306 3846 6930 11273 10882 3370 6846 9977 10616 3342 7041 9723 10696 10306 11072 2041 8040 14249 20878 21010 3530 7825 8598 10493 2612 5494 6791 7866 2669 5492 6682 7563 3976 7142 11775 11292 3480 7051 10417 11010 3453 7255 10153 11093 10756 11475 2042 8310 14687 21790 21786 3642 8054 8963 10855 2698 5658 7086 8149 2757 5656 6971 7830 4111 7361 12300 11718 3594 7263 10878 11420 3568 7476 10604 11506 11227 11895 2043 8589 15139 22743 22593 3758 8289 9346 11231 2787 5827 7394 8443 2848 5824 7273 8107 4251 7587 12849 12162 3712 7481 11360 11846 3687 7703 11075 11935 11720 12331 2044 8879 15606 23740 23432 3878 8532 9745 11621 2880 6001 7717 8748 2942 5998 7588 8395 4395 7820 13424 12624 3834 7706 11864 12289 3811 7938 11567 12381 12235 12784 2045 9178 16087 24783 24305 4002 8782 10162 12025 2975 6181 8054 9065 3040 6177 7918 8694 4545 8061 14025 13105 3960 7939 12391 12751 3938 8180 12083 12846 12774 13256 2046 9488 16584 25873 25213 4131 9040 10599 12445 3074 6366 8406 9394 3141 6362 8263 9005 4700 8309 14654 13606 4090 8178 12943 13231 4070 8430 12622 13329 13337 13746

Volume – I: Main Report 117 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.37: Traffic Projections Normal Traffic @5% Growth Rate

Location @ Km 40+000 Location @ Km65+000 Location @ Km 95+000 Location @ Km 117+000 Location @ Km 159+000 Location @ Km 174+000 Location @ Km 201+000 Total Total Average Average Tollabl Tollab Total Total Total Total Total Traffic Traffic e Total le Total Tota Tollable Total Tota Tollable Total Tota Tollable Total Tota Tollable Total Tota Tollable Total Tota Observe Observe Vehicle Vehicl Total Vehicl Vehicle l Vehicle Vehicl l Vehicle Vehicl l Vehicle Vehicle l Vehicle Vehicle l Vehicle Vehicle l d d PCU Year s PCU es PCU es PCU s PCU s PCU es PCU s PCU es PCU s PCU s PCU s PCU s PCU s PCU s PCU Base Year(2014 ) 1698 2933 4973 4658 603 1205 1896 1886 323 469 1388 1074 337 479 1361 1007 667 945 2656 2003 586 954 2356 1964 549 974 2258 1953 2412 2078 2015 1783 3079 5221 4890 633 1265 1990 1980 339 492 1458 1128 354 503 1429 1057 700 992 2789 2103 615 1002 2473 2062 576 1023 2371 2051 2533 2182 2016 1872 3233 5482 5135 665 1328 2090 2079 356 517 1531 1184 372 528 1500 1110 735 1041 2928 2209 646 1052 2597 2165 605 1074 2489 2153 2660 2291 2017 1965 3395 5757 5392 698 1395 2194 2183 373 543 1607 1243 390 554 1575 1166 772 1094 3075 2319 678 1104 2727 2274 635 1127 2614 2261 2793 2405 2018 2064 3565 6044 5661 733 1465 2304 2292 392 570 1688 1305 410 582 1654 1224 810 1148 3229 2435 712 1160 2863 2387 667 1184 2744 2374 2932 2526 2019 2167 3743 6347 5944 769 1538 2419 2406 412 598 1772 1371 430 611 1737 1285 851 1206 3390 2557 748 1218 3006 2507 700 1243 2882 2493 3079 2652 2020 2275 3930 6664 6242 808 1615 2540 2527 432 628 1861 1439 452 642 1824 1349 893 1266 3560 2685 785 1278 3157 2632 735 1305 3026 2617 3233 2784 2021 2389 4127 6997 6554 848 1695 2667 2653 454 660 1954 1511 474 674 1915 1417 938 1329 3737 2819 825 1342 3315 2763 772 1370 3177 2748 3395 2924 2022 2508 4333 7347 6881 891 1780 2801 2786 477 693 2051 1587 498 707 2011 1488 985 1396 3924 2960 866 1410 3480 2902 811 1439 3336 2885 3564 3070 2023 2634 4550 7714 7225 935 1869 2941 2925 500 727 2154 1666 523 743 2111 1562 1034 1465 4121 3108 909 1480 3654 3047 851 1511 3503 3030 3743 3223 2024 2766 4777 8100 7587 982 1963 3088 3071 525 764 2262 1749 549 780 2217 1640 1086 1539 4327 3263 955 1554 3837 3199 894 1586 3678 3181 3930 3384 2025 2904 5016 8505 7966 1031 2061 3242 3225 552 802 2375 1837 576 819 2327 1722 1140 1616 4543 3426 1002 1632 4029 3359 938 1666 3862 3340 4126 3554 2026 3049 5267 8930 8364 1083 2164 3404 3386 579 842 2494 1929 605 860 2444 1808 1197 1696 4770 3597 1053 1713 4230 3527 985 1749 4055 3507 4332 3731 2027 3201 5530 9377 8783 1137 2272 3574 3555 608 884 2618 2025 635 903 2566 1899 1257 1781 5009 3777 1105 1799 4442 3703 1034 1836 4257 3683 4549 3918 2028 3362 5807 9846 9222 1194 2386 3753 3733 639 928 2749 2126 667 948 2694 1994 1320 1870 5259 3966 1160 1889 4664 3889 1086 1928 4470 3867 4777 4114 2029 3530 6097 10338 9683 1253 2505 3941 3920 671 974 2887 2233 701 995 2829 2093 1386 1964 5522 4165 1218 1983 4897 4083 1140 2025 4694 4060 5015 4319 2030 3706 6402 10855 10167 1316 2630 4138 4116 704 1023 3031 2344 736 1045 2971 2198 1455 2062 5798 4373 1279 2083 5142 4287 1198 2126 4929 4263 5266 4535 2031 3891 6722 11397 10675 1382 2762 4345 4322 739 1074 3182 2462 772 1097 3119 2308 1528 2165 6088 4591 1343 2187 5399 4501 1257 2232 5175 4476 5529 4762 2032 4086 7058 11967 11209 1451 2900 4562 4538 776 1128 3342 2585 811 1152 3275 2423 1605 2273 6392 4821 1410 2296 5669 4727 1320 2344 5434 4700 5806 5000 2033 4290 7411 12566 11769 1523 3045 4790 4765 815 1184 3509 2714 852 1210 3439 2545 1685 2387 6712 5062 1481 2411 5953 4963 1386 2461 5705 4935 6096 5250 2034 4505 7782 13194 12358 1599 3197 5030 5003 856 1244 3684 2850 894 1270 3611 2672 1769 2506 7048 5315 1555 2531 6250 5211 1456 2584 5991 5182 6401 5513 2035 4730 8171 13854 12976 1679 3357 5281 5253 899 1306 3868 2992 939 1334 3791 2805 1857 2632 7400 5581 1633 2658 6563 5472 1528 2713 6290 5441 6721 5789 2036 4966 8579 14546 13625 1763 3525 5545 5516 944 1371 4062 3142 986 1400 3981 2946 1950 2763 7770 5860 1714 2791 6891 5745 1605 2849 6605 5713 7057 6078 2037 5215 9008 15274 14306 1852 3701 5822 5791 991 1440 4265 3299 1035 1471 4180 3093 2048 2901 8158 6153 1800 2930 7235 6032 1685 2991 6935 5999 7410 6382 2038 5476 9459 16037 15021 1944 3886 6113 6081 1040 1512 4478 3464 1087 1544 4389 3248 2150 3046 8566 6461 1890 3077 7597 6334 1769 3141 7282 6299 7780 6701 2039 5749 9932 16839 15772 2041 4080 6419 6385 1092 1587 4702 3637 1141 1621 4608 3410 2258 3199 8995 6784 1985 3231 7977 6651 1858 3298 7646 6614 8169 7036 2040 6037 10428 17681 16561 2143 4284 6740 6704 1147 1667 4937 3819 1198 1702 4839 3581 2371 3359 9444 7123 2084 3392 8376 6983 1951 3463 8028 6944 8578 7388 2041 6339 10950 18565 17389 2251 4499 7077 7040 1204 1750 5184 4010 1258 1787 5081 3760 2489 3527 9917 7479 2188 3562 8795 7332 2048 3636 8429 7291 9007 7757 2042 6656 11497 19494 18258 2363 4723 7431 7392 1265 1838 5443 4210 1321 1877 5335 3948 2614 3703 10413 7853 2298 3740 9234 7699 2151 3818 8851 7656 9457 8145 2043 6988 12072 20468 19171 2481 4960 7803 7761 1328 1929 5715 4421 1387 1971 5601 4145 2744 3888 10933 8246 2412 3927 9696 8084 2258 4009 9293 8039 9930 8552 2044 7338 12676 21492 20130 2605 5208 8193 8149 1394 2026 6001 4642 1457 2069 5881 4352 2882 4083 11480 8658 2533 4123 10181 8488 2371 4209 9758 8441 10427 8980 2045 7705 13309 22566 21136 2736 5468 8602 8557 1464 2127 6301 4874 1529 2173 6176 4570 3026 4287 12054 9091 2660 4329 10690 8913 2490 4419 10246 8863 10948 9429 2046 8090 13975 23695 22193 2872 5741 9032 8984 1537 2234 6616 5118 1606 2281 6484 4798 3177 4501 12656 9545 2793 4546 11224 9358 2614 4640 10758 9306 11495 9900

Volume – I: Main Report 118 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 4.38: Traffic Projections Normal + Diverted Traffic @5% Growth Rate

Average Average Traffic Traffic Location @ Km 40+000 Location @ Km65+000 Location @ Km 95+000 Location @ Km 117+000 Location @ Km 159+000 Location @ Km 174+000 Location @ Km 201+000 Observe Observe d (Veh) d (PCU) Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Tollable Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total PCU Tollable PCU Tollable PCU Tollable PCU Tollable PCU Tollable PCU Tollable PCU Vehicle Vehicles PCU Vehicles PCU Vehicles PCU Vehicles PCU Vehicles PCU Vehicles PCU Vehicles PCU Vehicles Vehicles Vehicles Vehicles Vehicles Vehicles Year s Base Year(2014 ) 2161 4279 5600 6090 1011 2465 2369 3179 717 1692 1836 2327 732 1702 1807 2257 1051 2146 3140 3258 966 2156 2824 3217 927 2177 2722 3205 2900 3362 2015 2269 4493 5880 6395 1062 2588 2487 3338 753 1776 1928 2444 769 1787 1898 2370 1103 2254 3297 3421 1015 2264 2965 3378 973 2286 2858 3365 3045 3530 2016 2382 4718 6174 6714 1115 2717 2611 3505 790 1865 2024 2566 807 1877 1992 2488 1159 2366 3462 3592 1065 2377 3114 3546 1022 2400 3001 3534 3197 3707 2017 2502 4954 6482 7050 1171 2853 2742 3681 830 1959 2126 2694 848 1971 2092 2613 1217 2485 3635 3772 1119 2496 3269 3724 1073 2520 3151 3710 3357 3892 2018 2627 5201 6806 7403 1229 2996 2879 3865 872 2056 2232 2829 890 2069 2197 2743 1277 2609 3816 3960 1174 2621 3433 3910 1127 2646 3308 3896 3524 4087 2019 2758 5461 7147 7773 1291 3146 3023 4058 915 2159 2344 2970 934 2173 2306 2881 1341 2739 4007 4158 1233 2752 3605 4105 1183 2779 3473 4091 3701 4291 2020 2896 5734 7504 8161 1355 3303 3174 4261 961 2267 2461 3119 981 2281 2422 3025 1408 2876 4208 4366 1295 2890 3785 4311 1242 2918 3647 4295 3886 4505 2021 3041 6021 7879 8569 1423 3468 3333 4474 1009 2381 2584 3275 1030 2395 2543 3176 1479 3020 4418 4584 1360 3034 3974 4526 1304 3063 3829 4510 4080 4731 2022 3193 6322 8273 8998 1494 3642 3500 4698 1059 2500 2713 3439 1082 2515 2670 3335 1553 3171 4639 4814 1428 3186 4173 4753 1369 3217 4021 4736 4284 4967 2023 3352 6638 8687 9448 1569 3824 3675 4932 1112 2625 2849 3611 1136 2641 2804 3501 1630 3330 4871 5054 1499 3345 4381 4990 1438 3377 4222 4972 4498 5216 2024 3520 6970 9121 9920 1647 4015 3858 5179 1168 2756 2991 3791 1193 2773 2944 3676 1712 3496 5114 5307 1574 3512 4600 5240 1510 3546 4433 5221 4723 5476 2025 3696 7319 9577 10416 1730 4216 4051 5438 1226 2894 3141 3981 1252 2912 3091 3860 1797 3671 5370 5572 1653 3688 4830 5502 1585 3724 4655 5482 4959 5750 2026 3881 7685 10056 10937 1816 4426 4254 5710 1288 3038 3298 4180 1315 3057 3245 4053 1887 3855 5639 5851 1735 3872 5072 5777 1664 3910 4888 5756 5207 6038 2027 4075 8069 10559 11484 1907 4648 4466 5995 1352 3190 3462 4389 1381 3210 3408 4256 1982 4047 5921 6143 1822 4066 5326 6066 1748 4105 5132 6044 5468 6340 2028 4279 8472 11087 12058 2002 4880 4690 6295 1420 3350 3636 4608 1450 3371 3578 4469 2081 4250 6217 6451 1913 4269 5592 6369 1835 4311 5388 6346 5741 6657 2029 4492 8896 11641 12661 2102 5124 4924 6610 1491 3517 3817 4838 1522 3539 3757 4692 2185 4462 6527 6773 2009 4483 5871 6687 1927 4526 5658 6663 6028 6989 2030 4717 9341 12223 13294 2207 5380 5170 6940 1565 3693 4008 5080 1598 3716 3945 4927 2294 4685 6854 7112 2109 4707 6165 7022 2023 4752 5941 6997 6329 7339 2031 4953 9808 12834 13959 2318 5649 5429 7287 1643 3878 4209 5334 1678 3902 4142 5173 2409 4920 7197 7467 2215 4942 6473 7373 2124 4990 6238 7346 6646 7706 2032 5201 10298 13476 14657 2434 5932 5700 7652 1726 4072 4419 5601 1762 4097 4349 5432 2529 5166 7556 7841 2325 5189 6797 7741 2231 5240 6550 7714 6978 8091 2033 5461 10813 14150 15389 2555 6229 5985 8034 1812 4275 4640 5881 1850 4302 4567 5703 2656 5424 7934 8233 2442 5449 7137 8129 2342 5502 6877 8099 7327 8496 2034 5734 11354 14857 16159 2683 6540 6285 8436 1902 4489 4872 6175 1943 4517 4795 5989 2788 5695 8331 8644 2564 5721 7494 8535 2459 5777 7221 8504 7694 8920 2035 6020 11922 15600 16967 2817 6867 6599 8858 1998 4713 5116 6484 2040 4743 5035 6288 2928 5980 8747 9077 2692 6007 7868 8962 2582 6065 7582 8930 8078 9366 2036 6321 12518 16380 17815 2958 7210 6929 9301 2097 4949 5371 6808 2142 4980 5286 6602 3074 6279 9185 9530 2826 6308 8262 9410 2711 6369 7961 9376 8482 9835 2037 6637 13144 17199 18706 3106 7571 7275 9766 2202 5197 5640 7149 2249 5229 5551 6932 3228 6593 9644 10007 2968 6623 8675 9880 2847 6687 8359 9845 8906 10326 2038 6969 13801 18059 19641 3261 7949 7639 10254 2312 5456 5922 7506 2361 5490 5828 7279 3389 6922 10126 10507 3116 6954 9108 10374 2989 7022 8777 10337 9352 10843 2039 7318 14491 18962 20623 3424 8347 8021 10767 2428 5729 6218 7881 2479 5765 6120 7643 3559 7269 10633 11033 3272 7302 9564 10893 3139 7373 9216 10854 9819 11385 2040 7684 15215 19910 21654 3596 8764 8422 11305 2549 6016 6529 8275 2603 6053 6426 8025 3737 7632 11164 11584 3436 7667 10042 11438 3296 7741 9677 11397 10310 11954 2041 8068 15976 20906 22737 3775 9202 8843 11870 2677 6316 6855 8689 2733 6356 6747 8426 3923 8014 11722 12164 3607 8051 10544 12010 3460 8128 10161 11967 10826 12552 2042 8471 16775 21951 23874 3964 9662 9285 12464 2811 6632 7198 9124 2870 6673 7084 8848 4120 8414 12308 12772 3788 8453 11071 12610 3633 8535 10669 12565 11367 13179 2043 8895 17614 23049 25068 4162 10146 9750 13087 2951 6964 7558 9580 3014 7007 7439 9290 4326 8835 12924 13410 3977 8876 11625 13241 3815 8961 11202 13193 11935 13838 2044 9340 18494 24201 26321 4371 10653 10237 13741 3099 7312 7936 10059 3164 7358 7810 9755 4542 9277 13570 14081 4176 9320 12206 13903 4006 9410 11762 13853 12532 14530 2045 9807 19419 25411 27637 4589 11185 10749 14429 3254 7678 8333 10562 3322 7725 8201 10242 4769 9741 14249 14785 4385 9785 12816 14598 4206 9880 12350 14545 13159 15257 2046 10297 20390 26682 29019 4819 11745 11287 15150 3416 8062 8749 11090 3489 8112 8611 10755 5007 10228 14961 15524 4604 10275 13457 15328 4416 10374 12968 15273 13816 16020

Volume – I: Main Report 119 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

CHAPTER 5 ENGINEERING SURVEY, ANALYSIS & DESIGN

5.1 Engineering Surveys and Investigations

5.1.1 The engineering surveys and investigations shall be divided into the following components: x Topographic, alignment and land use survey x Road inventory survey x Road condition survey x Bridge condition survey x Soil, geo-technical, material, hydrology and drainage surveys

5.1.1.1 Topographic, Alignment and Land Use Survey The activities and deliverables forming part of the topographic, alignment and land use survey are described below : (a) Divide the Project Highway into various stretches as per terrain classification. (b) Identify sections of Project Highway which fall within urban limits and need two laning in accordance with the Manual. (c) Identify sections of Project Highway which require rising. Such sections will be identified with attention being paid to the previous history of submergence and the extent to which the subgrade is likely to be affected by the capillary action if the section is not raised. (d) As far as possible, the existing alignment would be retained subject to the following requirements: (e) Identify stretches which do not meet the criterion of ruling design speed, i.e. where radii of horizontal curves are less than desirable minimum. Prepare realignment plans for improving geometrics in such stretches. (f) Identify stretches out of above, which meet the criterion of minimum design speed, i.e. where the radii of horizontal curves are more than the absolute minimum (This will enable the Authority to take a view on whether to include such stretches for improving geometrics in the initial stage or these can be postponed by a few years and in the meantime steps can be taken to acquire the necessary land for the ROW). (g) Identify stretches where stopping sight distance is not available. Work out possible improvement plan to increase the sight distance to provide overtaking sight distance. Also work out option to increase the sight distance to provide at least the intermediate sight distance. (h) Identify stretches, other than those in above, where intermediate sight distance is not available. Work out possible improvement plan to increase the sight distance to provide overtaking sight distance. Also work out possible improvement plan to increase the sight distance to provide at least the intermediate sight distance. (i) Identify stretches where the gradients are steeper than the ruling gradient for the relevant terrain condition. Work out and prepare an improvement plan for the vertical alignment in such stretches.

Volume – I: Main Report 120 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Divide improvement plans of such stretches into the following two parts: i. Stretches where gradient is more than the limiting gradient ii. Stretches where gradient is more than the ruling gradient but less than the limiting gradient. (The Authority can take a view on whether improvements of stretches in this category shall be taken up or not.) (j) Identify stretches where extra width of roadway and carriageway at curves is required. (k) Identify stretches involving construction of new bridges and other grade separated structures including those requiring reconstruction and their approaches. Work out proposal for location of such structures and alignment of approaches. (l) Based on the improvement plans of horizontal and vertical alignment, prepare alignment plans, L-Sections and cross-sections of the entire Project Highway. Scale of drawings shall be as per IRC: SP:19. Proposed improvements shall be marked on the plans. Such improvements will include raising of road, widening of roadway, widening of existing carriageway, location of median and the side on which the new two-lane carriageway is to be provided, provision of shoulders – both paved and granular, new structures, underpasses, grade separators, service roads, additional road signs, road furniture, safety devices, relocation of utilities, removal of trees, etc. (m) Also prepare a separate Land Plan of the Project Highway showing the existing ROW (along with all the existing assets within the ROW e.g. structures, drains, service roads, trees, utilities and safety devices) and proposed additional land required in various stretches for improvement of geometrics, construction of new structures, provision of intersections, interchanges, service roads, toll plazas, project facilities, etc. The Land Plan should also show encroachments, if any. A list of such encroachments along with their brief description shall also be prepared and included in the Feasibility Report. (n) For additional land proposed to be acquired as per final alignment plan of the Project Highway, the Land Plans shall be marked on duly certified village maps showing khasra numbers and shall be furnished along with a report which will include detailed schedules in respect of the proposed acquisition of land holdings as per revenue records in a format that would enable the Authority to initiate land acquisition proceedings. (o) A set of cross-sections of the existing road including urban sections at one km intervals for each homogeneous section in plain/rolling terrain and at 100 m intervals in mountainous/steep terrain shall be provided by the Consultant. In plain/ rolling terrain, additional cross-sections shall be provided for curves at the start, at the middle and at the end. These cross-sections along with proposed improvement plan and preliminary design shall form the basis of preparation of indicative BOQ for the Project Highway.

5.1.1.2 Road Inventory Survey Deliverables under this component shall include: (a) An inventory of road, culverts, bridges and other structures like railway over- bridges /under passes, flyovers (grade separated structures), underpasses and overpasses. Identification of stretches of the Project Highway which -

Volume – I: Main Report 121 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

1) are affected by frequent flooding; 2) are subjected to water logging; 3) pass through black cotton soil area; 4) pass through marshy area; or 5) pass through weak soil stratum (b) Typical cross-sections of the existing road showing the crust composition of pavement shoulders and drains (one cross-section for every five km of the road). (c) Identification of sections in cutting. (d) Identification of culverts requiring: 1) Reconstruction (all culverts which are structurally distressed shall be reconstructed as new structures). 2) Widening (all existing culverts which are not to be reconstructed shall be widened equal to the roadway width). 3) Repairs and/or rehabilitation along with preliminary proposals. 4) New construction

5.1.1.3 Road Condition Survey The Consultant shall undertake a survey of the visual condition of the pavement and shoulders of the Project Highway and provide its report as per Proforma-4 of Annexure-1. The Consultant should also report if distresses are observed in the pavement and shoulders. It will also identify sections requiring reconstruction.

5.1.1.4 Bridge Condition Survey The activities and Deliverables forming part of bridge condition survey are specified below: (a) The Consultant shall carry out a detailed inspection of every bridge and other structures such as railway over/under bridges, overpasses, underpasses and grade separators including flyovers. (For guidance, see IRC: SP: 35 and IRC: SP: 52). (b) For each structure, the Consultant shall indicate the distresses observed, if any, in respect of various components of the structures e.g. bearings, expansion joints, wearing coat, railings/crash-barriers, foundations, substructures (abutments, piers, pier caps), superstructure (Proforma-5). On the basis of the distresses observed, the Consultant shall divide the structures into the following categories: 1) Structures requiring reconstruction immediately as part of first stage development (all such structures shall be provided as new structures); 2) Structures where distresses are not so severe and reconstruction can be postponed to a subsequent stage say for a period of 7 to 8 years; if any major repairs are required in the meantime, these shall be so indicated for each such location; 3) Structures requiring repairs and/or rehabilitation (for such structures indicate preliminary proposals for repairs and/or rehabilitation);

Volume – I: Main Report 122 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

4) Structures requiring widening (for such structures indicate widening methodology); and 5) Structures that shall be retained.

5.1.1.5 Soil, Geotechnical, Material, Hydrology and Drainage Surveys The activities and Deliverables forming part of the soil, geotechnical, material, hydrology and drainage surveys are described below: (a) The characteristics of the existing soil, two samples from every five km of the Project Highway or closer where change in soil type is encountered. (b) The determination of subgrade CBR (soaked) every three km of the Project Highway or closer where change in soil type is encountered. (c) Benkelman Beam Deflection measurements on the Project Highway – one set of ten readings in 250 m for every three km of the Project Highway. (d) Investigations of the subsoil strata (one trial bore and/or test pit at embankment and one in river bed at locations where new bridges or other structures are proposed. The depth of trial bore/ test pit shall be as per IRC standards). (e) Preliminary hydraulic data for bridges, design discharge, HFL, LWL, etc. with a view to checking adequacy of existing waterway. (f) A broad assessment of the drainage condition and requirement of the Project Highway.

5.2 Proposal for Sections passing through urban areas The consultant would identify the stretches of the Project Highway which pass through the urban areas. For each of these stretches, the Consultant shall prepare an improvement plan of the stretch to provide a two-lane carriageway with paved shoulders, covered drains, etc. If there is any constraint due to available ROW or additional land to be acquired, the same shall be brought to the attention of the Authority on immediate basis. In such situations, a bypass may be needed to avoid the urban area. 5.3 ROBs/RUBs The Consultant shall identify all locations of the existing railway level crossings on the Project Highway. Data regarding number of closures per day shall be provided. However, the Consultant may propose retention of such railway crossings which are on sidings etc. where it would not be cost-effective to replace them with ROBs/RUBs. The Consultant shall prepare and submit indicative GADs of the proposed ROBs/RUBs including viaduct portion in the approaches based on preliminary consultation with the railway authorities concerned. (The GAD of ROBs/RUBs existing or under construction in the vicinity of the Project Highway could also be kept in view). 5.4 Protective Works in Hill Sections, Retaining Walls, Breast Walls, etc. For the stretches passing through hills, the Consultant shall identify the broad requirements of retaining walls, breast walls, etc. for the purposes of preparing rough cost estimates. 5.5 Road Signs, Safety Devices a. The Consultant shall propose provision of Road Signs, Pavement Markings, Safety Barriers, Railings, Delineators, Chevron Markings, Traffic Attenuators, Road Boundary Stones, Km Stones, 200 m Stones.

Volume – I: Main Report 123 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

It shall also include Crash Barriers for existing bridges. b. The Consultant shall propose overhead signs on the Project Highway and provide an outline of the same giving size and location. 5.6 Toll Plazas The Consultant shall investigate and propose suitable location(s) for the Toll Plaza(s), keeping in view the requirements laid down in the Toll Rules, Model Agreement for EPC and the Manual. It shall provide a typical layout plan for each Toll Plaza and indicate the additional land required keeping in view the requirements laid down in the Manual. 5.7 Truck Lay-Byes The Consultant shall undertake field surveys and identify suitable locations for provision of truck laybyes on the Project Highway. Truck laybyes shall, in general, be located near check-barriers, interstate borders, places of conventional stops of the truck operators etc. The length of each such truck laybye shall also be indicated. 5.8 Bus Bays and Bus Shelters The Consultant shall undertake field surveys and identify suitable locations for provision of bus bays and bus shelters on the Project Highway. As far as possible, bus bays shall not be located on horizontal curves, summit of vertical curves and bridges. Good visibility must be ensured. Further, the bus bays should not be too close to major intersections. The length of each such bus bay shall also be indicated. The Consultant shall also indicate the locations of bus stands/bus stops provided by the concerned State Transport Authorities on the Project Highway.

5.9 SOIL AND MATERIAL INVESTIGATION

5.9.1 General As part of detailed project report preparation, the consultants conducted soils and materials investigation, analysis of subgrade soil properties along the project corridor as well as investigation on sources of available construction materials from borrow areas and quarries/crushers for the proposed construction works. The schedule of testing covered the gamut of investigations in lights of terms of reference includes the following: Investigation for Road Works: The investigations are carried out to assess the suitability (strength characteristics) of the existing sub-grade soil along the proposed project corridor for design and construction of sub-grade, embankment; determine the thickness, composition, and suitability of various layers of existing pavement sections; assessment of the design parameters to determine the thickness of overlay and new pavement composition for the existing and widened portions (shoulders part) respectively based on good quality of soil and materials available at reasonable cost. Investigation for Construction Materials: To ascertain the suitability and availability of soils from borrow areas and quarry materials including manufactured materials within a reasonable haulage for construction of subgrade, sub-base, base and top layers (bituminous/concrete) of the designed pavement.

Volume – I: Main Report 124 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

5.9.2 Field Investigation – Sampling and Testing Field tests were conducted and also samples of soil / construction materials were collected from subgrade of existing road and pavement layers and stone metal / sand quarries. Table 5.1 presents the sampling criteria, tests and testing procedures adopted for various field and laboratory tests.

Table 5.1 – Site Sampling and Testing Criteria

Testing Criteria Sl. Type of Soil Sampling Criteria Standard Code No. Sample Description of Test Applicable

Existing Subgrade and Pavement Materials i) Subgrade Minimum of one In-situ Density IS 2720 (Pat- 29) Strength and subgrade soil samples In-situ Moisture Pavement were obtained for every IS 2720 (Pat- 2) Content Composition 2.5 km (or) less along the Soil Classification IS 1498 Test Pits alignment. Sieve Analysis IS 2720 (Pat – 4)

Atterberg Limits IS 2720 (Pat – 5)

Laboratory Compaction Test IS 2720 (Pat – 8) (Modified Proctor Test)

4-day soaked CBR at 3 energy levels IS 2720 (Pat – 16) corresponding to

Free swell Index IS : 2720 (Pat-40)

Materials Investigation

ii Borrow Area Soils Representative samples of Soil Classification IS 1498 potential borrow area soils Sieve Analysis IS 2720 (Pat – 4) were collected. Atterberg Limits IS 2720 (Pat – 5)

Laboratory IS 2720 (Pat – 8)

Volume – I: Main Report 125 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Testing Criteria Sl. Type of Soil Sampling Criteria Standard Code No. Sample Description of Test Applicable Compaction Test (Modified Proctor Test)

4-day soaked CBR at 3 energy levels IS 2720 (Pat – 16) corresponding to

Free swell Index IS : 2720 (Pat-40) v) Coarse aggregate Representative samples Sieve Analysis IS:2386 (Part-1) samples from of various sizes of stone Flakiness and IS 2386 (Part – 1) crushers/quarries including stone dust were Elongation Index collected from two Specific Gravity and IS 2386 (Part – 3) quarries. Water Absorption

Aggregate Impact IS 2386 (Part – 4) Value (AIV)

Stripping and Coating IS 6241 test

Los Angeles Abrasion IS 2386 (Part-4) Value (LAV) vi) Fine Aggregates Two representative Grain Size Analysis IS 2386 (Part – 1) (Sand) samples were collected Designation of zone IS 383 – 1997 and the listed tests are conducted. Specific Gravity IS 2386 (Part – 3) Fineness Modulus IS 383 – 1997

5.9.3 Investigations on Subgrade of Existing Pavement

Subgrade Strength Test Pits: The subgrade investigations were carried out to know the strength properties of the existing soil. Visual inspection of the existing pavement condition was carried out prior to commencement of sub-grade investigation work. The general testing scheme of existing road will indicates testing at least three subgrade soil samples for each

Volume – I: Main Report 126 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

homogeneous road segment or three samples for each soil type encountered, whichever is more. It was ensured to dig subgrade strength test pits at every 2.5 km (or) less on the retaining alignment, even same soil strata encountered on lengthy homogeneous sections, while collecting samples. The various in-situ tests conducted and laboratory tests included in the testing program on soil samples along the alignment as per the project requirements are summarized in Table 5.2. The pavement composition details (pavement course, material type, and thickness) are also recorded at every test pit. Discussion on the tests conducted and results obtained are carried out in the following sections.

5.9.4 Field Tests and Results Field tests were conducted as per the project requirement to determine the subgrade characteristics and strength. The field testing for subgrade soil includes: - In-situ density and moisture content at each test pit

5.9.4.1 Field Density & Moisture Content In-situ density (field density) and moisture content were determined as per the standards enlisted in Table 5.1. Field density is used to evaluate the degree of compaction and existing subgrade CBR at field density state. The details of field dry density and field moisture content test results are furnished in Annex 9 A and Table 5.2 presents a summary of the test results for all the sections.

Table 5.2: Statistical Summary of Field Test Results

Design Ch. (km) FMC (%) FDD (gm/cc)

Road From To Min Max Avg. Min Max Avg.

35.000 85.000 5.5 9.0 6.8 1.58 1.84 1.71

SH-32 85.000 122.050 4.5 8.5 6.4 1.50 1.96 1.75

139.200 208.250 3.0 8.5 6.0 1.55 1.96 1.74

Volume – I: Main Report 127 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

1. Summary of Subgrade Soil Density (MDD Vs FDD) 2.20 2.10 2. 2.00 1.90 ) 3. c 1.80 c / 1.70 m g

( 1.604. y t

i 1.50 s

n 1.40

e 5. MDD (gm/cc) FDD (gm/cc) D 1.30 y r 1.206. D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 8 5 0 0 0 0 8 5 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 8 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 1 7 5 0 5 0 6

7. 7 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 0 0 1 1 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 9 0 0 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 8. Existing Chainage SH-62 (km)

Figure 5.1: Illustrative Summary of FDD & MDD along the project corridor

5.9.5 Laboratory Tests and Results The laboratory testing for subgrade includes: - Characterization (Grain size, Atterberg limits and free Swell Index) at each of the subgrade strength test pit - Laboratory moisture-density characteristics - Laboratory CBR; 4-day soaked at three energy levels About 50 kg of soil sample was collected in damp proof bag(s) from each test pit from each subgrade strength test pit for testing purposes. The details like location/ chainage & other identification marks were recorded for the sample bags and double packed with care so that no damage would occur while transporting to the laboratory for conducting the tests as indicated in Table 5.1.

(i) Soil Classification and Distribution The laboratory test results of subgrade strength test pits are furnished in Annex 9 A. The following Table 5.3 provides a summary of the soil classification and properties of the soil encountered in the field along the alignment. The illustrative summary of subgrade soil class and properties like Clay and Silt content, Liquid Limit, Plasticity Index and Free Swelling Index is furnished in Figure 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5 and 5.6 respectively

Table 5.3: Summary of Subgrade Soil Properties Project Sections (km) Soil Class Km 35.000 to Km 85.000 to Km Km 139.200 to Km 85.000 122.050 Km 208.250 Range of LL (%) 17 - 23 18 – 24 19 – 33

Volume – I: Main Report 128 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Project Sections (km) Soil Class Km 35.000 to Km 85.000 to Km Km 139.200 to Km 85.000 122.050 Km 208.250 Range of PI NP - 8 NP – 8 NP – 14 DFS (%) 0.0 – 20 0.0 – 15.0 0.0 – 25 MDD (gm/cc) 1.96 – 2.10 1.97 – 2.11 1.92 – 2.09 CBR at 97 % MDD 8.0 – 15.4 9.4 – 17.2 7.0 – 15.0 Degree of Compaction 75.2 – 92.0 71.4 – 96.5 73.2 – 98.9

(ii) Laboratory California Baring Ratio (CBR) Laboratory CBR tests were carried out on the collected samples as per IS: 2720 (Part-16). All the collected samples were tested at three energy levels for determination of 4 days soaked CBR at 97% of MDD and the details of CBR at every test location are furnished in Annex 9 A. The degree of compaction is determined as the ratio in percentage of field dry density to laboratory maximum dry density. The illustrative summary of degree of compaction and CBR at 97% MDD is presented at Figure 5.7 and 5.8 respectively. The section wise summary of degree of compaction and CBR at 97% MDD is included in Table 5.4.

ML&CL SM-SC 10% 30%

SM SC 42% 18%

Subgrade Soil Class Distribution

Figure 5.2: Illustrative Summary of Subgrade Soil Class Distribution in the

Project corridor

Volume – I: Main Report 129 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Summary of Clay & Silt Content (% of Passing Through 75µ Sieve) 90 t n

e 80 t n

o 70 C

t 60 l i

S 50 d

n 40 a

y 30 a l

C 20 f

o 10

% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 8 5 0 0 0 0 8 5 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 8 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 1 7 5 0 5 0 6 7 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 0 0 1 1 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 9 0 0 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 Existing Chainage (km)

Figure 5.3: Illustrative Summary of % of clay and silt content along the project corridor

Summary of Liquid Limit (% ) 35 30 )

% 25 ( t i

m 20 i L 15 d

i Figure 4.4: Illustrative Summary of Liquid Limit along the project corridor u q

i 10 L 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 8 5 0 0 0 0 8 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2 8 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 1 7 5 0 5 0 6 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 7 0 0 1 1 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 9 0 0 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 Exisitng Chainage (km)

Volume – I: Main Report 130 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

PI = NP PI 5-10 42% 48%

PI 0-5 10%

Plastic Index Distribution

Figure 5.5: Illustrative Summary of Plasticity Index in the project corridor

FSI >15 14% FSI = 0 36% FSI 10-15 25%

FSI 0-10 25%

Free Swell Index Distribution

Figure 5.6: Illustrative Summary of Free Swell Index in the project corridor

Volume – I: Main Report 131 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Summary of Degree of Compaction (% ) 120.00 ) %

( 100.00 n o i t 80.00 c a p

m 60.00 o C f

o 40.00 e e r g

e 20.00 D 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 8 5 0 0 0 0 8 5 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 8 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 1 7 5 0 5 0 6 7 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 0 0 1 1 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 9 0 0 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 Existing Chainage (km)

Figure 5.7: Illustrative Summary of Degree of Compaction along the project corridor

Summary of 4 day Soaked CBR at 97% MDD (% ) 20.0 ) 18.0 % ( 16.0 R 14.0 B

C 12.0 d

e 10.0 k

a 8.0 o

S 6.0 y

a 4.0 D

- 2.0 4 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 8 5 0 0 0 0 8 5 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 8 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 1 7 5 0 5 0 6 7 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 0 0 1 1 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 9 0 0 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 Existing Chainage (km)

Figure 5.8: Illustrative Summary of CBR at 97% MDD along the project corridor

Volume – I: Main Report 132 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Observations and Conclusions

(i) Soil Classification and Distribution

The percentile distribution of soil classification, Liquid Limit, Plastic Index and Free Swell Index is presented in pie and bar charts as above. The presented values are self-explanatory and the discussion will follows as below.

From the figure 5.2, it is evident that subsoil is generally consistent throughout the project corridor and is predominantly Sand with silt and clay

Because of silt presence in the sand, the Liquid Limit (LL) is ranging between 17- 33%, and these values are within the limit as per MoRTH specifications (<50%). As the majority of the subgrade soils are sand with silt and clay in nature, and around 40% of samples are Non-Plastic and the free swell index is also relatively low. All the measured PI and FSI values are also within the acceptable limits as per MoRTH guidelines, of 25% and 50% respectively.

(ii) Strength Parameters

Figure 5.1 evident the variance between MDD and FDD, where the same is converted in-terms of degree of compaction. The degree of compaction (Figure 5.7) along the project corridor is ranging between 71.4% - 98.9%.

Figure 5.8 evident the CBR at 97% MDD is good along the project length except few locations where, clay sands are present. The average CBR value at 97% of MDD is 11.1% on the project road.

5.9.5 Existing Pavement Composition and Analysis

Existing pavement composition (pavement course, material type, and thickness) was recorded at every subgrade strength test pit dug at an interval of 1km along the road segment.

The details of existing pavement crust are furnished in Annex 9 B. And the summary is presented in tabular form as well illustrative diagram in Table 5.5 and Figure 5.9 respectively.

Table 5.5: Summary Pavement Crust Details along the project corridor

Volume – I: Main Report 133 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km 212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Pavement Composition (mm) S. Location (Km.) Old Old Morrum/ Remarks No. Bituminous Granular Bituminous Granular Hard Layer Layer From To Layer Layer Gravel Old Granular Layer at 1 75 175 - - - 35.000 85.000 few locations

2 85.000 122.050 45 140 - - - Morrum at few locations

3 139.200 165.000 50 165 - - 130

4 165.000 172.000 70 90 40 150 200

5 172.000 208.250 75 185 - - 200

Volume – I: Main Report 134 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e. from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Pavement Composition Chart : SH-62_Sojat - Pindwada Road

Existing Chainage in km 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 5 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 9 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 6 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 2 7 5 9 5 0 0 1 1 2 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 0 0 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 m m n i s s

e 100 n k c i h T

t 200 n e m e v

a 300 P

400

500 Bituminous Layer Granular Layer Old BT Old Granular Layer Morrum

600

Figure 5.9: Existing Pavement Crust Summary long the project corridor

Volume – I: Main Report 135 | P a g e Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Observations and Conclusions:

x The existing pavement along the project corridor is flexible in nature except in few built-up locations (villages) having CC brick shoving/ CC roads. The pavement composition comprises of bituminous layer, granular base/sub base on gravel subgrade.

x Except few locations, rest of the project road is in poor condition with thin bituminous layers on gravel basses.

x Throughout the length the thickness of the granular layer is relatively low as per the standard requirements.

5.9.7 Borrow Area Soil Majority of the project road is passing through plain/rolling terrain with good sub-grade soil. Eleven number of borrow area soil samples were collected along the project length to understand the material strength & availability of soil for construction of sub-grade and embankment in widening area.

Laboratory tests were conducted on the collected borrow area samples as mentioned in the Table 5.2. The detailed test results are published in Annexure 9 C and summary is given in Table 5.6.

Table 5.6: Summary of Borrow Area Test Results

Atterberg Modified Clay & Limits Proctor Test 4 days Borrow Side Soil Location Lead silt Soaked Area (LHS/ Classificat DFS (Km.) (km) content CBR @ No. RHS) ion LL MDD OMC % PI 97% MDD (%) gm/cc. (%)

BA-1 39+600 LHS 0.4 SM-SC 32.1 22 7 1.98 8.5 11.0 15.0

BA-2 54+450 LHS 0.7 SM 29.5 19 NP 2.01 8.1 11.0 0.0

BA-3 66+200 LHS 1.1 SM 28.0 19 NP 2.03 7.1 12.6 0.0

BA-4 80+200 RHS 0.3 SM-SC 27.0 20 5 2.01 7..7 13.6 9.3

BA-5 89+900 LHS 1.0 SM 23.8 21 NP 2.06 8.0 15.4 0.0

BA-6 138+150 RHS 0.45 SM-SC 38.0 23 7 2.03 8.8 12.3 10.0

BA-7 150+000 LHS 2.2 SM-SC 39.5 24 5 2.04 8.4 11.3 10.0

136 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Atterberg Modified Clay & Limits Proctor Test 4 days Borrow Side Soil Location Lead silt Soaked Area (LHS/ Classificat DFS (Km.) (km) content CBR @ No. RHS) ion LL MDD OMC % PI 97% MDD (%) gm/cc. (%)

BA-8 160+000 LHS 1.6 SM-SC 39.4 26 7 2.02 9.7 10.5 15.0

BA-9 171+800 RHS 0.5 SM 31.1 23 NP 2.04 8.0 11.5 0.0

BA-10 182+500 LHS 0.8 SM-SC 22.8 21 5 2.08 8.3 15.0 9.3

BA-11 200+000 LHS 1.1 CL 65.5 31 12 1.96 12.3 7.0 22.5

Observations and Conclusions

x The collected borrow soils are Sand with clay/ silt in nature. The liquid limit of the soil varies between 19 to 31 percent and Plasticity Index is Non-plastic to 12. The obtained LL & PI are within the acceptable limits as per MoRTH specifications.

x Free Swell Index of obtained soils is in the range of 0% to 22.5% which indicates soil of low swell potential.

x The MDD of borrow area soil vary between 1.96 to 2.08g/cc and Optimum moisture content required between 7.1 to 12.3%. As per MoSRT&H specifications the borrow soil should have the minimum MDD (IS: 2720, Pt-8) of 1.75 g/cc for use in Subgrade (Clause 305.2.1.5, MoRT&H) and a FSI (IS: 2720, Pt-40) of not more than 50 percent (Clause 305.2.1.2, MoRT&H).

x Referring to the above limitations, all the borrow area soils are meeting the required standards to use it in the subgrade & embankment construction.

5.9.8 Coarse Aggregate (Stone) Materials

One quarry materials is collected as potential sources for coarse aggregate and laboratory tests were conducted on the collected two samples at two different locations and crusher as mentioned in the Table 5.2. The summary of the test results are given in Table 5.7.

137 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 5.7: Test Results Summary of Coarse Aggregates (Stone)

Water Sl. Location / Size Specific A.I.V Crushing Coating Absorption No. Chainage (mm) Gravity (%) Value (%) Value (%) (%)

20MM 2.653 0.81 Sumerpur 30km lead from Sewari 19.7 10MM 2.648 0.93 1 (km 159+000) 28.8 > 95

6MM 2.589 1.10

Observations and Conclusions:

x Water absorption, AIV and coating values are within the acceptable limit for all the sources. 5.9.9 Fine Aggregate (Sand) Materials Sand samples were collected from Sumerpur sources and laboratory tests were conducted on the collected samples as mentioned in the Table 5.1. Summary of the test results are presented in Table 5.8.

Table 5.8: Test Results Summary of Fine Aggregates (Sand)

Sieve Analysis Materi (% Passing by Weight) al finer Sand Finenes Lead Location / Sp. Sl. No. than Equival s Zone (km) Chainage Gravity 4.75 1.18 0.600 0.150 75 ent (%) Modulus mm mm mm mm micro n (%) Sumerpur (30km from 1 30km 85.8 62.0 40.1 6.9 2.1 94.5 3.1 Zone-II 2.55 Sewari)

More Specification Limit For Zone I 90-100 30-70 15-34 0-10 3.0 than 50 2-3.5 - as per MOSRT Specification Limit For Zone II 90-100 55-90 35-59 0-10 3.0 2-3.5 - H for fine Specification Limit For Zone III 90-100 75-100 60-79 0-10 3.0 aggrega 2-3.5 - tes to

138 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

be used in Specification Limit For Zone IV 95-100 90-100 80-100 0-15 3.0 2-3.5 - bitumin ous mix

Observations and Conclusions:

x The fineness modulus of two samples is below the specified limits as given in the MoRTH specifications (not less than 2 or greater than 3).

x The sand Quarries are free from dust, lumps, soft or flaky material

x The sources is conforming nearly Zone II.

5.10 PAVEMENT DESIGN

5.10.1 GENERAL

The project envisages two-lane with paved shoulder carriageway for augmenting the capacity of design traffic with significant service life. The existing project road is a flexible pavement throughout the length. The pavement design includes strengthening of existing 2- lanes by providing appropriate bituminous overlay thickness, and widening of the existing carriageway with paved shoulders.

The new flexible pavement in the widening position is designed as per the guidelines of IRC: 37-2012 “Tentative guidelines for the design of flexible pavements” and for strengthening of existing carriageway, it has been followed and designed as per IRC: 81-1997- “Guidelines for Strengthening of flexible road pavements using Benkelman Beam Deflection Technique”. For the pavement design, the required information with regard to the parameters such as volume of traffic, growth rates and Vehicle Damage Factors (VDF) to predict the traffic over the design life was collected based on the traffic surveys conducted on project road, and also the required pavement evaluation study, soil and materials investigation was carried out to identify the existing strength of pavement and also to characterize the various layers of pavement materials in design.

5.10.2 DESIGN APPROACH

Since the existing road is of flexible pavement, only flexible pavement design option has been considered for widening position of main carriageway

139 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Based on the evaluation of the functional & structural properties of the existing pavement, subgrade strength and traffic requirements, the pavement design are carried out in three parts:

x Design of the new flexible pavement in widening portion x Design of the overlay for existing pavement

5.10.3 DESIGN STANDARDS

As per Chapter 5, IRC: SP 73-2007 which deals with pavement design, the following standards are applicable for new pavement of the project:

x New Flexible Pavement Design; IRC: 37-2012 – “Tentative Guidelines for the Design of Flexible Pavements” x Overlay Design IRC: 81-1997- “Guidelines for Strengthening of flexible road pavements using Benkelman Beam Deflection Technique”

5.10.4 DESIGN METHODOLOGY

IRC: 37-2012 “Tentative guidelines for the design of Flexible Pavements”

The guidelines on design of flexible pavement were first brought out in 1970, which were based on California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of subgrade and traffic in terms of number of commercial vehicles (more than 3 tonnes laden weight). These guidelines were revised in 1984 in which design traffic was considered in terms of cumulative number of equivalent standard axle load of 80 kN in millions of standard axles (msa) and design charts were provided for traffic up to 30 msa using an empirical approach.

The guidelines were revised again in 2001 when pavements were required to be designed for traffic as high as 150 msa. The revised guidelines used a semi-mechanistic approach based on the results of the MORTH’s research scheme R-56 implemented at IIT Kharagpur. The software, FPAVE was developed for the analysis and design of flexible pavements. Multilayer elastic theory was adopted for stress analysis of the layered elastic system. A large number of data collected from different parts of India under various research schemes of MORTH were used for the development of fatigue and rutting criteria from field performance data.

140 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

The traffic pattern has changed since then and so has the technology. The volume of tandem, tridem and multi-axle vehicles has increased manifold and heavier axle loads are common. Experience has been gained on the use of new form of construction and materials such as stone matrix asphalt, modified bitumen, foamed bitumen, bitumen emulsion, warm asphalt, cementitious bases and sub-bases, since the publication of the last revision of the guidelines. Conventional as well as commercially available chemical soil stabilizers are being successfully used in trial sections. Attention is focused on fatigue resistant bituminous mixes with high viscosity binders for heavy traffic with a view to construct high performance long life bituminous pavements. The guidelines contained in this document reflect the current knowledge in the subject.

Conventional construction material like aggregates is becoming progressively scarce on account of environmental concerns as well as legal restrictions on quarrying while the construction activity has expanded phenomenally. This has shifted focus from large scale use of conventional aggregates to use of local, recycled and engineered marginal aggregates in construction.

It is recognized that research as well as performance trials have not been very extensive in India for some of the new materials but these have been included in the guidelines in the light of extensive performance reports and current practice in Australia, South Africa and other countries with due safeguards in design for heavy axle loads.

Accordingly, revision of IRC 37-2012 incorporates some of the new and alternate materials in the current design practices. A designer can use his sound engineering judgment consistent with local environment using a semi-mechanistic approach for design of pavements.

IRC: 81-1997 “Strengthening of Flexible Pavements”

IRC: 81-1997 “Guidelines for Strengthening of Flexible Road Pavements using Benkelman Beam Deflection Technique” gives the design of overlays for strengthening of the Flexible Pavements. Benkelman Beam Deflection survey has been carried out according to procedure given in IRC: 81-1997 and design of overlays is done for the respective characteristic deflection on the project road.

141 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

5.10.5 INPUT PARAMETERS FOR PAVEMENT DESIGN

The performance of pavements is affected by several factors which includes the following factors which are described as below.

5.10.6 Design Life of Pavement Layers

Bituminous Surfacing

Referring to the “Manual of Specifications and Standards for Two-laning of State Highways on B.O.T Basis”, IRC: SP 73-2007, the bituminous layers shall be designed for minimum of initial 12 years design traffic, and pavement shall be strengthened by bituminous overlay as and when required to extend the pavement life to full operation period. However, in this project the bituminous layers designed for 12 years of design traffic.

Base and Sub-Base

The unbounded layers are designed for minimum design period of 15 years (or) concessioner period witch ever is earlier as per IRC: SP 73-2007

5.10.7 Design Traffic Loads

Annual Average Daily Traffic

The base-year Average Daily Traffic (ADT) is classified into commercial, passenger and non- motorized traffic based on the classified traffic volume count surveys carried out on the different sections of project road. The details of Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) is given in the relevant chapter and summary of commercial vehicles related to pavement design is given in Table 5.9

Table 5.9: Section wise Annual Average Daily Traffic (Base year, 2015)

Mini Location Section BUS LCV 2 Axle 3 Axle MAV Bus 40+000 35+000 to 88+000 8 121 76 88 62 18 95+000 88+000 to 122+050 4 30 16 11 17 3 201+000 139+200 to 212.000 8 30 16 22 119 9

142 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Traffic Growth Rates

The mode-wise percentage growth factors derived on the basis of traffic demand estimates are adopted for projection of traffic data and is presented in relevant traffic report. The summary of commercial traffic growth rates is given in Table. 5.10. The cumulative standerd axle repetitions were calculated with consideration of minimum 5% growth as per IRC: SP: 73-2007. Table.5.10: Traffic Growth Rates (in percent)

Duration Mode 2012 to 2017 to 2022 to 2027 to 2032 to 2037 to 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 2042 2-Wheeler 7.9% 7.1% 6.4% 5.7% 5.2% 4.7% Auto Passengers 6.3% 5.7% 5.1% 4.6% 4.1% 3.7% Cars 8.3% 7.5% 6.7% 6.1% 5.5% 4.9% Mini Bus 3.7% 3.3% 3.0% 2.7% 2.4% 2.2% Bus 3.6% 3.2% 2.9% 2.6% 2.4% 2.1% Tractor 6.2% 5.6% 5.0% 4.5% 4.1% 3.7% Mini LCV 6.2% 5.6% 5.0% 4.5% 4.1% 3.7% LCV 6.2% 5.5% 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% 3.6% 2-Axle 1.0% 0.9% 0.8% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 3-Axle 6.0% 5.4% 4.9% 4.4% 3.9% 3.5% MAV 6.0% 5.4% 4.9% 4.4% 3.9% 3.5% Average 5.6% 5.0% 4.5% 4.1% 3.7% 3.3%

Lane Distribution Factor

The lane distribution factors adopted for the project are as given below:

x 2-lane single carriageway roads: 50 percent of the number of commercial vehicles in both the direction should be considered for design (as per clause 4.5.1 of IRC: 37-2012).

Vehicle Damage Factor

The axle load surveys were conducted at all prioritized locations, the spectrum of axle loads and the numbers of equivalent 8.16 t standard axles for the different categories of commercial vehicles have been determined on the basis of the axle load surveys.

The equations for computing equivalency factor for single, tandem and tridem axles given below is used as directed in the IRC:37-2012 for converting different axle load repetitions into equivalent standard axle load repetitions:

Single axle with single wheel on either side = {axle load in kN / 65}4 143 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Single axle with dual wheel on either side = {axle load in kN / 80}4

Tandem axle with single wheel on either side = {axle load in kN / 148}4

Tridem axle with dual wheel on either side = {axle load in kN / 224}4

As the proposed road is a two lane single carriageway with granular shoulders, the higher VDF is considered for design from both directions. The analysis of Vehicle Damage Factors (VDF) is presented in Annexure 4 and the calculated VDF’s are summarized in Table 5.11

Table.4.11: Summary of Vehicle Damage Factor

Km 40+000 Km 159+000 Vehicle Class Sojat - Desuri - Sadri- Pindwara- Desuri Sojat Pindwara Sadri

BUS 1.16 1.09 1.04 1.12 Mini BUS 0.41 0.35 0.84 0.66 LCV 0.13 0.15 0.04 0.02 2 Axle 5.89 4.43 4.40 0.21 3 Axle 7.40 6.19 3.24 3.29 MAV 9.94 7.83 - - Design Traffic (Cumulative Number of Standard Axles)

The traffic loading in terms of the cumulative number of standard axles for the given period has been computed using the following relationship as given in IRC: 37-2001:

36511u^ r n` N uuu ADF r

Where, N = Cumulative number of standard axles to be catered for the design life in terms of msa. r = Annual growth rate of commercial vehicles n = Design life in years A = Initial traffic in the year of completion of construction in terms of number of commercial vehicles per day exceeding 3 tonnes D = Lane distribution factor F = Vehicle Damage Factor Based on the preceding discussions, the traffic loading in terms of cumulative number of equivalent 8.16 t standard axle loads have been computed for 12, 18 & 23 years. The detailed cumulative standard axles (CSA) calculations are presented in Annex 4.6 and the summary is given in Table 5.12.

144 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 5.12: Design Traffic in Terms of ESAL

8years 15 years 23 years Road Chainage (km) (2026) (2033) (2041) SH-62 40+000 11.21 25.33 48.64 SH-62 95+000 5.84 13.21 25.35 SH-62 201+000 5.47 12.36 23.73

**Traffic survey is conducted at 7 locations. Maximum MSA is taken into consideration for each HS. For HS 1 @ 40+000, HS 2 @ 95+000 and HS 3 @ 201+000.

5.10.8 Sub-grade Soil

With consideration of test results of borrow areas and existing subgrade soil, the optimum subgrade design CBR values are evaluated. The recommended effective subgrade CBR value for new pavement design in the widening area is recommended as 10%. 5.11 DESIGN OF NEW FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Design of new flexible pavement applies to widening portion of main carriageway, reconstruction stretches (if any). IRC:37-2012 was referred as a design guide for this project. In these guidelines the pavement was model as an elastic multilayer structure. The flexible pavements are designed for two failure models as below; a). Fatigue Model: Fatigue model has been calibrated in the R-56 (54) studies using the pavement performance data collected during the R-6 (57) and R-19 (58) studies sponsored by MORTH. Two fatigue equations were fitted, one in which the computed strains in 80 per cent of the actual data in the scatter plot were higher than the limiting strains predicted by the model (and termed as 80 per cent reliability level in these guidelines) and the other corresponding to 90 per cent reliability level.

-04 3.89 0.854 Nf = 2.21 * 10 x [1/İt] * [1/MR] (80 percent reliability)

-04 3.89 0.854 Nf = 0.711 * 10 x [1/İt] * [1/MR] (90 percent reliability)

Where,

Nf = fatigue life in number of standard axles,

İt = Maximum Tensile strain at the bottom of the bituminous layer

MR= resilient modulus of the bituminous layer. In these guidelines, cracking in 20 percent area has been considered for traffic up to 30msa and 10 percent for traffic beyond that.

145 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

b). Rutting Model: Like the fatigue model, rutting model also has been calibrated in the R-56 studies using the pavement performance data collected during the R-6 (57) and R-19 (58) studies at 80 per cent and 90 per cent reliability levels. The two equations are given below; -08 4.5337 N= 4.1656 x 10 [1/İv] (80 percent reliability)

-08 4.5337 N= 1.41 x 10 [1/İv] (90 percent reliability)

Where, N= Number of cumulative standard axles, and İv= Vertical strain in the subgrade In these guidelines the limiting rutting is recommended as 20 mm in 20 per cent of the length for design traffic up to 30 msa and 10 per cent of the length for the design traffic beyond. Referring to the above statements as stated in the IRC: 37-2012 and project design traffic (<30msa), 80% reliability is need to adopt for the pavement design. The new flexible pavements are design based on the catalogues provided in the clause 10.1 of IRC: 37-2012 for design life of bituminous layers for 12 years. The summary of the pavement composition is given as below at Table 4.13.

Table 5.13: New Flexible Pavement Composition in widening area

Design Traffic Pavement Composition Homogenous Section (km) (msa) Design (mm) CBR % 12 years (2030) Road From To Length Actual Adopted BC DBM WMM GSB SH-62 35 88 53 10 18.69 19 40 80 250 200 SH-62 88 123 35 10 9.74 10 40 50 250 200 SH-62 139 212 73 10 9.12 10 40 50 250 200

500mm of compacted subgrade should be provided below the GSB layer and the bottom layer of GSB will be extended till embankment slope to facilitate proper drainage in the pavement structure.

5.12 REHABILITATION AND STRENGTHENING OF EXISTING PAVEMENT

5.12.1 Computation of Design Traffic

Referring to clause 5.10.3 of IRC: SP: 73-2007, the initial design period of 12 years has been taken for design of overlay thickness. The earlier stated design traffic in Table 5.12 has been considered for calculation of overlay thickness.

5.12.2 Existing Pavement Condition

146 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

The experienced professionals have undertaken this investigation to collect the detailed visual information of the pavement and its associates. The observations are recorded at an interval of 200m along the project corridor, and the required information as per IRC: SP: 19- 2001 is collected.

The details Pavement condition survey is given at Annexure 9 E & the summary of prime distress of main carriageway is presented in Table 5.14.

Table 5.14: Summary of Pavement Condition Survey Chainage (km) Road Summary of Pavement Surface Distress (% of area) From To Condition cracking Potholes Patching Reveling Other 35.000 44.500 Fair - - 15 - 18 3 -5 Edge break 44.500 46.000 Poor CC Road in built-up area with 50% distresses 46.000 48.000 Fair - < 1 5 -7 5-7 Edge break 48.000 62.000 Poor 5-7 2-3 25-30 18-20 Rutting/Edge Break 62.000 85.000 Good - - - - Shoulder drop 85.000 88.000 Poor CC road & Flexible pavement in built-up area with 80% distresses 88.000 107.900 Poor 5-7 2-3 8-7 7-10 350mm edge break 107.900 115.300 Good - - - - - 115.300 117.000 Poor - 12-15 20-25 30-35 200mm edge break 117.000 122.050 Good - - - - - 139.200 146.000 Good - - - - - 146.000 149.000 Poor 5-7 7-10 7-10 30-35 Rutting/ Edge break 149.000 151.000 Good - - - - Edge break 151.000 165.000 Poor 7-10 10-12 15-20 20-25 Edge break/ Wheel 165.000 173.800 Poor 20-25 5-7 10-12 20-25 path settlement 173.800 177.200 Fair - < 1 3-5 5-7 Edge break 177.200 178.200 Poor 5-7 - - 30-35 Edge break 178.200 181.200 Fair 3-5 - 5-7 7-10 Wheel path settlement 181.200 203.500 Poor 5-7 3-5 7-10 25-30 Wheel path settlement 203.500 212.000 Fair 3-5 - - - -

147 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

5.12.3 Benkelman Beam Deflection

Benkelman Beam test for the project road was conducted to evaluate the structural strength of the existing pavement. The test was carried in as per the CGRA procedure given in IRC: 81- 1997. The Benkelman Beam Deflection (BBD) data was analysed to determine the Characteristic Deflection of the pavement for each kilometre of the section. The detailed methodology, test procedure, analysis and results of characteristic deflections are presented in pavement evaluation report, and also the analysis and results of each kilometre is presented in Annex 9 D.

Cumulative Deferential Analysis (CDA) is performed for identification of homogeneous sections. The analyses are presented in Annex 9D and summary of characteristic deflection is shown in Figure 5.10, and the same is used for identification of homogenous sections of the project corridor.

Summary of Ch. Deflection: SH-62 2.000 1.800 )

m 1.600 m

( 1.400 n

o 1.200 i t

c 1.000 e l

f 0.800 e

D 0.600 9. . h 0.400 C 0.200 10.0.000 11.

12. Existing Chainage (km)

5.10: Illustrative of Characteristic Deflection along the Project Road

5.12.4 Existing Subgrade and Pavement Layers

To determine the existing subgrade strength and relevant parameters, the test pits are dug at every 1km interval along the project corridor. As per the standard specifications, the required field and laboratory tests are conducted. All the tests and test results are presented in “Soil and Materials Investigation Report” along with the observations and conclusions.

148 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Subgrade soil and materials investigation results like Degree of Compaction, CBR at FDD and existing pavement composition are considered and reviewed in the contest of pavement rehabilitation, to determine/evaluate a better performance rehabilitation strategy.

5.12.5 Selection of Rehabilitation Strategy

The project corridor was delineated into number of homogeneous sections for selection of appropriate rehabilitation strategy by considering the following parameters as below.

a) Pavement condition b) Characteristic deflection c) Sub-grade soil characteristics like Degree of compaction, CBR at FDD, DCP-CBR, Pavement Composition and Free Swell Index.

Based on careful review of the above discussed strength parameters and their inter- relationships along with traffic considerations, the project road was recommended for overlay and partial reconstruction as per the existing condition.

5.12.6 Overlay Design as per IRC: 81-1997

The design of overlays for the existing carriageway pavement has been carried out taking into account the traffic, strength of the existing pavement based on detailed pavement investigation including BBD Testing. The strengthening (overlay) requirements for the existing road pavement have been worked out based on IRC: 81-1997.

Table 5.15 gives the details of overlay thicknesses for each homogeneous section for initial 12 years design period.

Table 5.15: Overlay Thickness as per IRC: 81-1997

Design Ch. Deflection Required Recommended Chinage (km) S.No Remarks Traffic (mm) Overlay in Overlay (mm) From To Length (msa) Avg. Adopted BM (mm) BC DBM 1 35.000 44.500 9.500 Overlay 1.326 1.350 128 40 50 2 44.500 46.000 1.500 Partial Reconstruction 3 46.000 48.000 2.000 Overlay 1.299 1.301 123 40 50 19 4 48.000 62.000 14.000 Partial Reconstruction 5 62.000 85.000 23.000 Overlay 0.958 0.981 57 40 6 85.000 88.000 3.000 Partial Reconstruction 7 88.000 107.900 19.900 Partial Reconstruction 8 107.900 115.300 7.400 Overlay 1.103 1.130 56 40 10 9 115.300 117.000 1.700 Partial Reconstruction 10 117.000 122.050 5.050 Overlay 1.103 1.130 56 40 11 139.200 146.000 6.800 Overlay 10 0.969 0.980 5 40 149 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Design Ch. Deflection Required Recommended Chinage (km) S.No Remarks Traffic (mm) Overlay in Overlay (mm) From To Length (msa) Avg. Adopted BM (mm) BC DBM 12 146.000 149.000 3.000 Partial Reconstruction 13 149.000 151.000 2.000 Overlay 1.070 1.070 33 40 14 151.000 165.000 14.000 Partial Reconstruction 15 165.000 173.800 8.800 Partial Reconstruction 16 173.800 177.200 3.400 Overlay 1.113 1.120 50 40 17 177.200 178.200 1.000 Partial Reconstruction 18 178.200 181.200 3.000 Overlay 1.068 1.103 47 40 19 181.200 203.500 22.300 Partial Reconstruction 20 203.500 212.000 8.500 Overlay 1.055 1.109 48 40 x The profile corrective course is not part of overlay thickness and it need to be provide as an extra thickness based on the requirement.

5.12.7 Partial Reconstruction Based on the existing road condition and other relevant parameters, few sections of the project road are recommended for partial reconstruction. In most of the sections the existing bituminous surfaces are distressed, and it is planned to do partial reconstruction from WMM layer onwards by scarifying the existing bituminous layers. The step by step procedure is as below;

Step-I (Scarification of Bituminous Layers): As a 1st step, the distressed existing bituminous layers will be scarified without disturbing the existing granular layer. If so, the existing granular layers will be re-compacted to the desired density.

Step-II (Calculation of existing sub-grade CBR): In the partial pavement design option, the existing granular layers are treated as equivalent to the GSB.

If the existing granular layers thicknesses are not adequate, additional GSB layer will be provided to compensate the same.

Step III (Building from WMM onwards): After placing and compaction of required additional GSB (if required, any) the pavement will be designed and constructed from WMM layer onwards as per the existing subgrade strength and design traffic.

The recommended partial reconstruction sections along with the design thickness are summarized in Table 5.16.

150 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Table 5.16: Summary of Recommended Partial Reconstruction Sections & Thickness Existing Recommended Pavement Chinage (km) Design Existing Granular Composition (mm) S.No Remarks Traffic Subgrade Layer Additional From To Length (msa) CBR (%) WMM DBM BC (mm) GSB 1 35.000 44.500 9.500 Overlay Partial 2 44.500 46.000 1.500 10.6 210 250 80 40 Reconstruction 3 46.000 48.000 2.000 Overlay Partial 19 4 48.000 62.000 14.000 10.2 150 100 250 80 40 Reconstruction 5 62.000 85.000 23.000 Overlay Partial 6 85.000 88.000 3.000 10.2 100 100 250 80 40 Reconstruction Partial 7 88.000 107.900 19.900 11.5 150 100 250 50 40 Reconstruction 8 107.900 115.300 7.400 Overlay 10 Partial 9 115.300 117.000 1.700 14.7 150 250 50 40 Reconstruction 10 117.000 122.050 5.050 Overlay 11 139.200 146.000 6.800 Overlay Partial 12 146.000 149.000 3.000 8.3 210 250 50 40 Reconstruction 13 149.000 151.000 2.000 Overlay Partial 151.000 165.000 14.000 8.5 150 100 250 50 40 Reconstruction Partial 14 165.000 173.800 8.800 10.4 230 250 50 40 Reconstruction 10 15 173.800 177.200 3.400 Overlay Partial 16 177.200 178.200 1.000 14.1 220 250 50 40 Reconstruction 17 178.200 181.200 3.000 Overlay Partial 18 181.200 203.500 22.300 8.4 175 100 250 50 40 Reconstruction 19 203.500 212.000 8.500 Overlay

151 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

CHAPTER 6 DESIGN STANDARD AND SPECIFICATIONS

6.1 General Due to presence of dense habitation / commercial complexes on either sides of the road, sizeable amount of vehicular traffic uses the existing road compared to other modes of transportation. Based on the assessment of present traffic and future growth, the design philosophy proposed to be followed embodied the following:-

x The project should provide enhanced safety, x The project should provide enhanced operational efficiency of the project highway, x The facility should be constructed with no/least disruption to existing traffic flow, x The facility should be safe, sound, economical within built engineering features, x The facility should be aesthetically pleasing and environment friendly, x The facility should provide the desired level of service,

Design Standard requirements have been framed for the following items for providing the desirable level of service, safety and soundness of structure. For this project it is proposed to follow Design Standards as per IRC Standards, Guidelines and Special Publications besides MORTH circulars and specifications. In the absence of any definite provisions on any particular issue, the following standards shall be referred to in that order:-

x Model Agreement for Engineering, Procurement and Constructions(EPC) x Manual Specifications and Standards for two lane with paved shoulders/Four laning of highways x Any other National or International Standards as considered suitable

The basic design philosophy is based on the consideration of existing alignment and traffic flow consideration, cross-sectional features of the proposed alignment, geometric, safety to cater the fast and uninterrupted movement of through traffic.

The material proposed to be used in project road shall conform to Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport & Highways, and Specifications for Road & Bridge Works, Fourth Revision, published by Indian Road Congress.

6.2 Geometric Design Standards Design standards for project call for an in-depth study of available and internationally adopted criteria for economy and safety. The consultants have initiated the study in this direction and the broad criteria emerging out of them are given in this section. The relevant standards include:

IRC Codes (With Latest Amendments) IRC: 5-1998 For General Features of Design IRC: 6-2000 For Loads and Stresses IRC: 112-2011 For Pre-stressed Concrete Road Bridges IRC: 22-1986 For Composite Construction

152 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

IRC: 36-1970 For Earthen Embankments IRC: 37-2012 For Design of Flexible Pavements IRC: SP48-1998 Hill Road Manual IRC:52-2001 Recommendations about Alignment Survey and Geometric Design in Hill Roads IRC: 65-1976 For Traffic Rotaries IRC : 69-1977 Space Standards For Roads in Urban Areas 1977 Guidelines on Regulation and Control of Mixed Traffic in Urban Areas IRC: 78-2000 For Substructure and Foundations IRC: 83-1999 (Part I) For Metallic Bearings IRC: 83-1987 (Part II) For Elastomeric Bearings IRC: 83-2000 (Part III) For POT PTFE, PIN and Metallic Guide Bearings IRC: 86-1983 For Geometric Design of Urban Roads IRC: 106 – 1990 Guidelines for Capacity of Urban Roads in Plain Areas

Special Publication Published by Indian Road Congress

x BS ( British Standards & Euro Codes) x BIS-Indian Standards x AASHTO

6.2.1 Terrain The project stretch under consideration passes through plain, rolling with certain stretches passing through ghat section.

6.2.2 Design Speed The design speed is the guiding criteria for correlating features such as sight distance, curvature and super elevation upon which the safe operation of the vehicle depends. As per IRC: SP-73 (Two laning manual), the design speed shall be varying with terrain which is classified as follows:-

6.2.3 Typical Cross Section As per Two laning manual IRC:SP-73, Typical cross sections are adopted. Normally, two lane carriageways with 1.5m paved and 1.0m gravel shoulder is to be followed for plain/rolling terrain. Fig. 2.1 describes the applicable TCS for 2 laning for plain/rolling terrain.

As per section 2.1(ii)a of Two laning manual, stretches passing through built up areas shall normally be provided with 4-lane divided carriageway

153 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

As per section 2.1(ii)b of Two Laning manual, where there are constraints of existing ROW width or difficulty in acquiring land along the existing alignment in built up areas, new bypass can be considered for construction. In case, two lane carriageway for the new bypass is provided then it shall be placed eccentric to ROW to facilitate proper widening to four lanes in future

6.2.3.1 Right of Way (ROW) The additional ROW is to be acquired to accommodate improved corridor of the project road.

6.2.3.2 Land Acquisition Based on the available ROW requirements, the additional land required for acquisition due to geometric improvements, proposed structures, proposed project facilities will be proposed.

Short stretches less than 1 km of varying terrain met with on the road stretch shall not be taken into consideration. In general, ruling design speed shall be adopted for various geometric design features of the road. Minimum design speed shall be adopted where site conditions are restrictive and adequate land width is not available.

Based on the available ROW requirements, the additional land required for acquisition due to geometric improvements, proposed structures, proposed project facilities will be proposed.

6.2.4 General Geometric Design Parameters :- As per Two laning Manual, geometric design parameters are to be adopted as below:-

Table 4.1: Design Standards 100 kmph-design speed in Plain terrain a Ruling Design Speed (kmph) 80 kmph-design speed in rolling terrain 50 kmph-design speed in mountainous terrain

b Right of Way

Lane Width in meters c Carriageway width 7.0m for 2 lane and 15m for 4 lane

Shoulder width (Paved and 2 lane open country -2.5m Granular) 2 lane Hilly area - 1.0 m on hill side and 2.0 m on valley side

Camber

d Main carriageway 2.50%

Earthen Shoulder 3.00%

154 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Radii Horizontal Curve in meters

Ruling/Absolute minimum Ruling Minimum/Absolute Road Type/ Terrain Design Speed Minimum

100/80 360/230 Plain

80/65 230/155 Rolling

50/40 90/60 Mountainous

Super Elevation

Maximum Super 7.0%(Maximum) Elevation

g

Rate of change 1 in 150 Plain & Rolling Terrain

Super Elevation 1 in 60 Mountainous Terrain

Longitudinal Gradient

For Widening/ For New Gradient Strengthening

h Minimum 0.30% 0.30%

3.3% in plain 3.3% in plain terrain terrain 5% in Ruling 5% in mountainous terrain mountainous terrain

5.0% in plain 5.0% in plain terrain terrain 6.0% in Limiting 6.0% in mountainous terrain mountainous terrain

Minimum Vertical Curve Length and Radii

Design Speed Minimum

i 100 60

80 50

50 30

155 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

6.2.5 Minimum Transition Length The minimum transition length for speed of 100 km/hour for curves of radii of 360m and 1800 m in plain and rolling terrain should be 130 m and 30m respectively.

The minimum transition length for different speeds and curve radii shall be as under:

Table 4.2: Minimum Transition Length

For speed 100 km / hour For speed 80 km / hour Minimum Curve Minimum transition radius transition Curve length (m) length (m) radius (m) (m) 360 130 230 90 400 115 300 75 500 95 360 60 600 80 400 55 800 60 500 45 900 55 600 35 1000 50 800 30 1200 40 900 30 30 1500 35 1000 1800 30 1100 30

Broken-back curves will be avoided to the extent possible. Minimum curve length would be 150m for a deflection angle of 5 degrees and this would be increased by 30 meters for each one-degree of decrease. No curve is required for deflection angle of less than one degree.

6.2.6 Sight Distance On two-lane roads, normally intermediate sight distance should be available throughout. However, overtaking sight distance should be provided in maximum possible length of the road. In case of valley curves, the curve length should be designed considering vehicle headlight distance during travel. For this purpose, the height of head light above road surface shall be taken as 0.75 m and at angle of 1 degree upwards.

Where horizontal and summit vertical curves overlap, the design should provide for the required sight distance both in vertical directions along the pavement and in horizontal direction on the inside of the curve.

6.2.7 Extra Widening at Horizontal Curves On horizontal curves with radius upto 300m, width of pavement and roadway shall be increased as per following table:-

156 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Curve Extra radius(m) Width(m) Upto 40 1.5 41-60 1.2 61-100 0.9 101-300 0.6

Extra widening should be achieved gradually on transition length of curve and entire widening should be achieved on inside of curve.

6.2.8 Vertical Alignment Standard considerations of designing the vertical alignment with smoothness in longitudinal profile, infrequent change of grades, avoidance of short valley curve in an otherwise continuous profile, avoidance of broken back grade lines, carrying the decks of small structures following the same profile as the flanking road section, and co-ordination with horizontal alignment, will be followed.

The drainage along the project stretch shall be kept in mind while finalizing the vertical alignment.

6.2.9 Vertical Clearances The minimum vertical clearances of any proposed grade separated structure, if any, above the existing road and at other cross roads are proposed as per Indian Roads Congress Standards IRC: 5-1998. The recommended vertical clearances of 5.5m above the existing road level shall be maintained for vehicular underpasses/structures and 3.0m for cattle & pedestrian underpass.

6.2.10 Proposal for Vehicle underpass/overpass The vehicular underpass/overpass shall be provided where all roads carrying traffic of more than 15000 pcus average of daily traffic.

6.2.11 Standards for Interchange Elements The design standards of the interchange elements viz. direct ramps, loops; speed change lanes are given hereunder: ¾ Speed, ¾ Radius and ¾ Sight Distance

The proposed design standards for these elements are compiled in Table below.

Table 4.3: Speed, Radius and Sight Distance for Interchange Elements

Design Speed Radius Stopping Sight Distance (m) (km/hr) (m)

157 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

Desirable (Ramp) 60 162 80

Desirable (Ramp) 50 112 60

Table 5.10 Standard for Interchange Elements

Speed Change Lane Design Stopping Radius Description Speed Sight (m) Acceleration Deceleration (Kmph) Distance (m) Lane (m) Lane (m)

Ramp 80 230 130 300 130 Loop 65 130 80 400 150 The desirable values are normally meant for Direct Ramps and diagonal connections.

6.2.13 Design Service Volume The project highway is proposed with geometrical improvement to 2 lane with paved shoulders configuration in open country and 4 laning or bypass in built up areas. The horizontal alignment and vertical profiles would be designed adequately to meet the design speed requirements.

Daily Design Service Volume in pcu Without paved With paved shoulder shoulder Plain 15000 18000

Rolling 11000 13000 Mountainous & 7000 9000 steep

6.2.14 Pavement Design

6.2.14.1 General The general design procedure is to be based on the prevalent practices in the country and abroad. The pavement is designed in accordance with IRC: 37 -2012 “Guidelines for the Design of Flexible Pavement”.

6.2.14.2 Design Traffic The traffic along the various sections of the project road will be worked out on the basis of the traffic studies carried out at site and based on available data. The design life of the pavement would be proposed after traffic studies for flexible pavement.

The design traffic is estimated in terms of equivalent 8.16 t standard axles expected on the design lane.

158 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

6.2.14.3 Preliminary Structural Design of Pavements Pavement structure has been designed based on the sub-grade strength, material characteristics and the design traffic. The pavement thickness requirements are worked out as per the following methods:

IRC 37: 2012

IRC 81: 1997

6.2.15 Preliminary Design of Structures The scheme for project corridor shall be worked out based on design standard available in IRC code.

6.2.15.1 Design Loading The structures in the project road shall be designed to sustain safely the most critical combination of various loads, forces and stresses that can co-exist as per the provisions of IRC: 6-2000. The allowable stresses and the permissible increase in stresses for various load combinations shall be adopted as per the relevant IRC codes.

6.2.15.2 Carriageway Live Load The carriageway live load combination considered for the design shall be as per Table 2 or IRC: 6-2000

The reduction in longitudinal effects on bridges accommodating more than two traffic lanes shall be considered in accordance with Clause 208 of IRC: 6-2000.

Tractive and Braking Force

The tractive and braking forces shall be considered as per the provisions of clause no. 214 of IRC: 6-2000.

Wind Forces The effect of wind as per clause no. 212 of IRC: 6-2000 shall be considered for the design of the various components of the bridge.

Seismic Forces The project road falls in seismic zone II

Based on the seismic zone classifications, given in CL.222 of IRC: 6-2000,

Seismic forces shall be calculated in accordance with clause number 222.5 of IRC: 6-2000.

6.2.15.3 Grade of Concrete The minimum Grade of concrete in various structural elements shall be as per IRC:112

6.2.15.4 Foundation The type and length of the foundation structure shall be based on the availability of suitable bearing stratum to withstand the loads as well as the load carrying capacity 159 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 105+000 to Km

174+000 of SH-32, Udaipur to Salumbar (Highway-I) in the State of Rajasthan

recommendations of soil expert. Based on the structure/scheme proposed the type of foundation (mono pile or pile group etc.) shall be finalized taking into cognizance the load carrying capacity recommendations.

6.2.15.5Deck Levels of Structures The deck levels of the structures carrying the structures, if any, shall be proposed based on the following parameters:

x Vertical clearance required above the existing carriageway; x Vertical profile of the structure; x The existing utilities and drainage requirements; x Cross road profile;

Only General Arrangement Drawings of structures shall be prepared. Detailed Design of structure is out of the scope of work of this assignment.

160 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

CHAPTER 7 IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL (ANNUITY MODE)

7.0 Introduction The scope of work is to study feasibility of up gradation of existing single lane highway to 2 lane as dictated by the existing traffic on the project road. The facility shall be planned in such a way that improved highway is safe, efficient and convenient to the users as well as public living adjacent to the highway. The design and rehabilitation options have been worked out based on the basis of engineering studies, traffic forecasts etc.

7.1 Improvement Proposals Improvement proposals apropos functional components manifested in appropriate horizontal and vertical alignments, sight distance availability, lateral and vertical clearances, intersection treatment etc. aim at improved design speed, road safety and also cover facilities such as proper intersection treatments, truck laybyes, bus bays, wayside amenities, toll plazas etc. Improvement proposals apropos structural components on the other hand calls for detailed evaluation of widening options, concentric or eccentric widening of the existing road as dictated by site situations like available ROW, existing utilities, terrain, etc., and also existing structural conditions, both for pavement and CD structures. As evident from the above, the first step towards formulating Improvement Options is to collect information on the project road primarily from engineering surveys and secondarily from various agencies concerned. Towards this end detailed information on past and present traffic, availability of land, condition of CD structures, potential sources of construction material, environmentally sensitive areas and social hot spots has been collected. Also collected are information pertaining to existing settlements, present configuration of intersections, importance of discrete cross roads, utility lines, locations of bus stops, truck parking etc. Subsequent to a close observation of all these parameters, frequent site-visits have been undertaken to formulate improvement options that suit requirements of the project. Detailed Traffic Survey has been conducted on the project road for 7 days at 7 locations. As per the traffic analysis, total AADT in PCU as on data ranges from 1007 to 4658 PCU. Since the present day PCU is less than 7500 PCU, the project road is proposed for development to 2 lane with granular shoulder configuration as per PWD Note No. F.6(25)AR/Gr 3/2014 dated 27th August, 2014 . Accordingly, Development to 2 Lane with Granular Shoulder option is planned for the development of project road.

7.3 Homogeneous Section

Based on traffic survey and existing road condition observed at site, the project road has been classified in 3 homogeneous sections i.e. HS-1 (Km 35+000 to KM 88+000), HS-2 (Km 88+000 to Km 123+000) & HS-3 (Km 139+000 to Km 212+000).

161 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Adopted Villages Survey Observed Base Total Existing Road Homogeneous Location Traffic AADT AADT(after Road Condition Section (Maximum Traffic) (Vehicles/PCU) diversion) Width (m) (Vehicles/PCU) HS-1: Km From 35+000 to Km Sojat to Fair to Km.40+000 4973/4658 5600/6090 3.5 88+000 Jojawar Poor Length=53Km HS-2: Km From 88+000 to Km Jojawar Fair to Km.95+000 1388/1074 1836/2327 3.5 123+000 to Desuri Poor Length=35Km HS-3: Km From 139+000 to Sadri to Fair to Km.159+000 2656/2003 3140/3258 3.5 212+000 Pindwara Poor Length=73Km

Toll Section Chainage Design Length (In km) Sr. BT Width 2 Lane with Granular Remarks No. From To (m) Shoulder

1 35+000 122+334 87.334 7.0 Sojat - Desuri Sadri - 3 139+000 211+720 72.720 7.0 Pindwara TOTAL 160.054

7.4 Junctions

Details of Major Junction S.No. Chainage Junction Type Side(LHS/RHS) Name Remarks 1 34910 O Major Pali,Beawar,Sojat 2 73900 Y Major RHS 3 103400 Y Major LHS Bypass Start & End 4 104600 Y Major LHS 5 107850 Y Major LHS 6 109300 X Major 7 111150 Y Major RHS 8 117700 Y Major LHS Bypass Start & End 9 119400 Y Major LHS 10 122860 Y Major RHS To Jodhpur 11 139000 + Major 12 141475 Y Major LHS Bypass Start Conc. 13 143820 Y Major LHS Bypass Start Conc. 14 150700 Y Major LHS Bypass Start 15 152775 Y Major LHS Bypass End 16 155525 Y Major RHS

162 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

17 157875 Y Major LHS Bypass Start 18 161950 Y Major LHS Bypass End 19 167100 Y Major RHS Bypass Start 20 170200 Y Major RHS 21 208325 Y Major LHS To Pindwara Market Conc. 22 211825 Y Major LHS To Pindwara Market Conc. 23 212092 T Major

Details of Minor Junction Junction S.No. Chainage Side(LHS/RHS) Name Remarks Type 1 35+035 T Minor RHS To Shib Colony Conc. 2 35+042 T Minor LHS To Shib Colony Conc. 3 35+569 T Minor LHS To Shib Nagar Conc. 4 35+800 Y Minor RHS IC Colony Conc. 5 38+340 T Minor LHS Conc. 6 40+950 Y Minor LHS To Siyat Village Conc. 7 49+107 Y Minor RHS To Sawrad Conc. 8 49+426 Y Minor RHS To Sawrad Conc. 9 49+720 T Minor RHS To Sawrad Conc. 10 50+358 T Minor LHS To Hamir Conc. 11 50+515 T Minor RHS To Risama Conc. 12 55+560 T Minor RHS To Dudorbali Conc. 13 RHS To Manda Conc. 14 59+473 T Minor LHS To Kantariya Conc. 15 63+510 T Minor LHS To Malap Conc. 16 LHS To Bopari Conc. 63+735 + Minor 17 RHS To Vojabas Conc. 18 65+055 T Minor LHS To Saran Conc. 19 62+215 T Minor RHS Conc. 20 62+220 T Minor LHS Conc. To Seriyari 21 68+900 T Minor LHS Conc. Bahar 22 68+915 T Minor RHS To Shibsagar Conc. 23 62+212 T Minor LHS To Seriyari Conc. To Goraser 24 62+216 T Minor RHS Conc. Seng 25 70+650 T Minor LHS to Agre Conc. 26 71+503 T Minor LHS To Kajalbasha Conc. To Pali 27 71+510 T Minor RHS Conc. Marware 28 75+050 Y Minor LHS To Dal Village Conc. 29 77+206 T Minor RHS To Bara Bandh Conc. 30 77+374 T Minor RHS To Daberi Conc.

163 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

31 79+185 T Minor RHS To Nabagurah Conc. 32 79+473 T Minor LHS To Devgarah Conc. 33 LHS To Baghola Conc. 80+762 + Minor 34 RHS Conc. To Ghuda 35 82+157 T Minor LHS Conc. Chatra To Pali 36 82+175 T Minor RHS Conc. Marware 37 83+825 Y Minor LHS To Bhagora Conc. 38 86+445 Y Minor LHS To Karubara Conc. To Dhalpura 39 LHS BT Village 87+248 + Minor To Jojawar 40 RHS BT Village To Bancor 41 LHS BT Village 88+230 + Minor To Ghunghila 42 RHS BT Village To Jorkiya 43 91+775 Y Minor LHS Conc. Village To Jorkiya 44 92+583 T Minor RHS Conc. Village To Sansari 45 94+340 T Minor RHS BT Village To Sansari 46 95+065 T Minor RHS BT Village To Gurha 47 95+370 Y Minor LHS BT Durjun Village 48 97+650 T Minor RHS To Ashapura BT To Pranota 49 98+553 T Minor LHS BT Village To Bhanka 50 99+937 T Minor RHS Conc. Village 51 100+840 T Minor LHS To Kot village Conc. To Gura 52 105+133 T Minor RHS Conc. hetaotaion 53 107+790 Y Minor RHS To Pali BT To Guda 54 112+755 T Minor RHS Conc. Askoran 55 113+985 T Minor LHS To Jupi village BT To 56 115+290 T Minor LHS Mahakaleshwar BT Temple Road To Mangthunda 57 117+520 T Minor RHS BT pur 58 120+100 Y Minor RHS Conc. 59 120+475 Y Minor RHS Conc. 60 139+320 T Minor LHS Conc.

164 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

61 139+553 Y Minor LHS 62 139+603 T Minor LHS Conc. 63 139+685 64 139+722 T Minor LHS Conc. 65 139+773 T Minor LHS Conc. 66 139+797 T Minor RHS Conc. 67 139+813 T Minor LHS Conc. 68 139+032 T Minor LHS Conc. To Praban 69 LHS Conc. 145+755 + Minor Nagar 70 RHS Shiv Mandir Conc. 71 146+925 Y Minor RHS To BT 72 147+300 T Minor LHS To latara Conc. 73 147+656 T Minor LHS To latara Conc. 74 149+502 T Minor RHS To Gurakalyan Conc. 75 154+140 + Minor Conc. 76 156+635 T Minor RHS Conc. 77 156+777 + Minor Conc. To Sawati 78 LHS Conc. 158+987 + Minor Village 79 RHS To Bali Conc. To Sawari 80 159+240 + LHS Conc. Minor Village 81 RHS To Bali Conc. 82 161+635 + LHS To SH 62 Conc. Minor To Padrala 83 RHS Conc. Village 84 164+390 T Minor LHS To Bijapur Conc. 85 LHS To Bijapur Conc. 165+077 + Minor 86 RHS To Sumerpur Conc. 87 LHS To Bijapur Conc. 165+675 + Minor 88 RHS To Bijapur Conc. 89 165+805 T Minor LHS To Bijapur Conc. 90 165+982 T Minor LHS To Bijapur Conc. 91 166+000 T Minor RHS To Sana Conc. 92 166+165 Y Minor LHS To Bijapur Conc. 93 LHS Conc. 168+515 + Minor 94 RHS To Bhatunda Conc. 95 175+700 T Minor LHS To Bera Conc. 96 176+135 T Minor LHS To Bera Conc. 97 176+272 T Minor RHS To More Village Conc. 98 176+373 T Minor LHS To Bera Conc. 99 176+605 Y Minor LHS To Bera Conc. 100 178+175 Y Minor RHS To Sumerpur Conc. 101 178+700 Y Minor RHS To Sumerpur Conc.

165 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

102 182+735 T Minor LHS To Kotar Village Conc. 103 183+365 Y Minor LHS To Kotar Village Conc. To Bhandar 104 184+292 T Minor LHS Conc. Village To Bhandar 105 184+500 Y Minor RHS Conc. Village To Bhandar 106 184+525 T Minor LHS Conc. Village To Bhandar 107 184+660 T Minor RHS Conc. Village To Bhandar 108 184+817 T Minor LHS Conc. Village 109 188+415 T Minor LHS Conc. 110 189+020 T Minor RHS To Birompura Conc. To Nana 111 190+250 T Minor RHS Conc. Railway Station 112 190+950 Y Minor RHS 113 191+225 Minor RHS 114 193+365 Y Minor LHS To Nana Conc. 115 193+627 T Minor LHS Conc. 116 197+973 T Minor RHS Conc. 117 200+409 T Minor LHS To Amli Conc. 118 200+515 Y Minor RHS To Amli Conc. 119 200+950 Y Minor RHS To Amli Conc. 120 201+495 Y Minor RHS To Amli Conc. 121 201+505 Y Minor LHS To Amli Conc. 122 201+615 Y Minor LHS To Amli Conc. 123 201+875 Y Minor RHS To Amli Conc. 124 202+575 T Minor RHS To Amli Conc. 125 203+110 T Minor RHS To Sadmagura Conc. To Binani 126 LHS Conc. Cement Factory 206+028 + Minor To Binani Staff 127 RHS Conc. Quarter

166 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

7.5 Pavement Design

The performance of pavements is affected by several factors which includes the following factors which are described as below.

7.5.1 Design Life of Pavement Layers

Bituminous Surfacing

Referring to the “Manual of Specifications and Standards for Two-laning of State Highways on B.O.T Basis”, IRC: SP 73-2007, the bituminous layers shall be designed for minimum of initial 12 years design traffic and pavement shall be strengthened by bituminous overlay in accordance with the table given below. During the period, functional overlays in the form of thin bituminous surfacing would be required to provide a good riding surface and also to retard further deterioration of the pavement. Construction Period : July, 2017 to Dec, 2018 (1.5 years)

Concession Period : July, 2017 to December, 2041 (24.5 years)

Operation period : 2019 to 2041 (23 years)

167 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Pavement will be constructed and strengthened in following steps:

InitialDesign

For12years (2019-2030)

RenewalLayer Afterͼyearsofconstruction (2024)

StrengtheningLayer1st 12yearafterconstruction (2030)

RenewalLayer

18yearafterconstruction (2036)

Base and Sub-Base

The unbounded layers are designed for minimum design period of 15 years or Design Concession Period whichever is more as per IRC: SP 73-2007

Rigid Pavement

The rigid pavements are designed for minimum design period of 30 years as per IRC: SP 73-2007

168 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

7.5.2 Vehicle Damage Factor

The axle load surveys are conducted on project road at all prioritized locations. The spectrum of axle loads and the numbers of equivalent 8.16 t standard axles for the different categories of commercial vehicles have been determined on the basis of the axle load surveys.

The equations for computing equivalency factor for single, tandem and tridem axles given below is used as directed in the IRC:37-2012 for converting different axle load repetitions into equivalent standard axle load repetitions;

Single axle with single wheel on either side = {axle load in kN / 65}4

Single axle with dual wheel on either side = {axle load in kN / 80}4

Tandem axle with single wheel on either side = {axle load in kN / 148}4

Tridem axle with dual wheel on either side = {axle load in kN / 224}4

As the proposed road is a two lane single carriageway with granular shoulders, the higher VDF is considering for design from both directions. The calculated VDF’s are summarized in Table 7.1.

Table 7.1: Summary of Vehicle Damage Factor

Km 40+000 Km 159+000 Vehicle Sadri- Pindwara- Class Sojat - Desuri - Pindwara Sadri Desuri Sojat

BUS 1.16 1.09 1.04 1.12 Mini BUS 0.41 0.35 0.84 0.66 LCV 0.13 0.15 0.04 0.02 2 Axle 5.89 4.43 4.40 0.21 3 Axle 7.40 6.19 3.24 3.29 MAV 9.94 7.83 - -

7.5.3 Design Traffic (Cumulative Number of Standard Axles)

The traffic loading in terms of the cumulative number of standard axles for the given period has been computed using the following relationship as given in IRC: 37-2012: 36511u^ r n` N uuu ADF r Where,

169 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

N = Cumulative number of standard axles to be catered for the design life in terms of msa.

r = Annual growth rate of commercial vehicles

n = Design life in years

A = Initial traffic in the year of completion of construction in terms of number of commercial vehicles per day exceeding 3 tonnes

D = Lane distribution factor

F = Vehicle Damage Factor

Based on the preceding discussions, the traffic loading in terms of cumulative number of equivalent 8.16 t standard axle loads have been computed for 12,18 and 23 years after construction. The detailed cumulative standard axles (CSA) are calculated and the summary is given in Table 7.2.

Table 7.2: Design Traffic in Terms of ESAL 8years 15 years 23 years Road Chainage (km) (2026) (2033) (2041) SH-62 40+000 11.21 25.33 48.64 SH-62 95+000 5.84 13.21 25.35 SH-62 201+000 5.47 12.36 23.73

**Traffic survey is conducted at 7 locations. Maximum MSA is taken into consideration for each HS. For HS 1 @ 40+000, HS 2 @ 95+000 and HS 3 @ 201+000.

7.5.4 Design of New Flexible Pavement

Design of new flexible pavement applies to widening portion of main carriageway, reconstruction stretches (if any). IRC: 37-2012 was referred as a design guide for this project. Design crust thickness for the flexible pavement as arrived is given below in Table 7.3

Table 7.3: New Flexible Pavement Composition for 12 years Design Life

Design Traffic Pavement Composition Homogenous Section (km) Design (msa) (mm) CBR % 12 years (2030)

Road From To Length Actual Adopted BC DBM WMM GSB

170 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

SH-62 35 88 53 10 18.69 19 40 80 250 200

SH-62 88 123 35 10 9.74 10 40 50 250 200

SH-62 139 212 73 10 9.12 10 40 50 250 200

500mm of compacted subgrade should be provided below the GSB layer and the bottom layer of GSB will be extended till embankment slope to facilitate proper drainage in the pavement structure.

7.5.5 Strengthening Layer

The pavement shall be strengthened after 12 / 23 years i.e, in the year 2030 & 2041 respectively as per the details given below:

Table 7.4: Design MSA for Strengthening of pavement

st Chainage 12 years 23 years 1 Strengthening Road (2030) (km) (2041) (12- 23 years) (2030)

SH-62 40+000 19.00 48.64 29.64

SH-62 95+000 10.00 25.35 15.35

SH-62 201+000 10.00 23.73 13.73

Assuming a characteristic deflection of 0.90mm and using IRC:81-1997, we get the suggested strengthening layer as under :

Table 7.5: DBM/ BC layer thickness for Strengthening of pavement

Chainage BM Layer for 1st Equivalent DBM Layer Road (km) Strengthening for 1st Strengthening

(12- 23 years) (2030) (12- 23 years) (2030)

SH-62 40+000 65mm 50mm

SH-62 95+000 35mm 40mm

SH-62 201+000 30mm 40mm

171 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

7.5.6 Overlay Design as per IRC: 81-1997

The design of overlays for the existing carriageway pavement has been carried out taking into account the traffic estimated for an initial design period of 12 years i.e. upto the year 2030. The strengthening (overlay) requirements for the existing road pavement have been worked out based on Clause 7.5 of IRC: 81-1997 but the same stands superseded in the light of amendment issued in IRC journal Volume 42, Issue dated 10 Oct, 2014 wherein the revised clause reads as given below:

“From the structural considerations, the recommended minimum bituminous overlay thickness is 40mm”

As per the preliminary investigations, characteristic deflections seem to be in the range of 0.9 mm to 1.3 mm which when combined with Design MSA gives the overlay thickness as under:

Table 7.6: Overlay thickness

Chainage Length Effective Sr. BC+DBM (Km) MSA 2030 No. From To (mm)

19 1 35+000 48+000 13.0 40+50 19 2 48+000 88+000 40.0 40+0 10 3 88+000 123+000 35.0 40+0 10 4 139+000 212+000 73.0 40+0

172 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

7.6 Bypass / Realignment

1. 73+700 to 75+050 - Realignment

2. 85+600 to 90+500 – Jojawar Bypass

173 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

3. 103+260 to 104+670 – Kolar Bypass

4. 107+100 to 109+300- Realignment

174 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

5. 109+300 to 111+230 – Ganthi Bypass

6. 116+800 to 117+700 – Realignment

175 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

7. 117+700 to 119+400 – Lampi Bypass

8. 120+000 to 120+800 - Realignment

176 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

9. 142+500 to 143+800 – Junaa Realignment

10. 150+700 to 152+800 – Madara Bypass

177 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

11. 153+125 to 155+500 – Lunawa Bypass

12. 157+900 to 161+900 – Sewari and Padarla Bypass

178 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

13. 167+100 to 170+200 – Bhatund Bypass

7.7 Typical Cross Section

The project road is divided into following cross sections:

Sr. TCS DESCRIPTION HS-I HS-II HS-III LENGTH (Km) No. TYPE TCS – Bypass/ Realignment in 1 11.15 6.09 17.21 34.45 1 Plain/ Rolling Terrain

Concentric Widening in 2 TCS - 2 12.35 4.90 12.02 29.27 Plain/ Rolling Terrain

TCS – 3 Eccentric Widening (Left) 3.65 1.57 6.39 11.61 3

TCS – Eccentric Widening 2.31 2.09 6.60 11.00 4 (Right) 4 Raising due to 5 TCS - 5 3.00 1.00 2.00 6.00 submergence

6 TCS - 6 Widening in Built up Area 10.03 4.56 6.15 20.74

179 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Reconstruction from 7 TCS -7 10.51 14.13 22.36 47.00 WMM

TOTAL 53.00 34.34 72.72 160.06

TCS 1: Typical Cross Section in Realignment/ Bypass

TCS 2: Typical Cross Section of concentric widening in Rolling/Plain Terrain

180 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

TCS 3: Typical Cross Section of Eccentric (LHS) widening in Rolling/ Plain Terrain

TCS 4: Typical Cross Section of Eccentric (RHS) widening in Rolling/Plain Terrain

TCS 5: Typical Cross Section of Rising in Rolling/Plain Terrain

181 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

TCS 6: Typical Cross Section of Built Up Area with drain

TCS 7: Reconstruction due to poor BT Road (From WMM)

Tentative TCS schedule

TCS schedule based on horizontal alignment plan

DESIGN CHAINAGE (KM) LENGTH WIDENING TCS APPLICABLE DESCRIPTON (M) FROM TO

34+910 37+000 2090 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up 37+000 38+400 1400 Concentric TCS 2 New 38+400 38+600 200 Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 38+600 40+860 2260 Concentric TCS 2 40+860 45+330 4470 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up

182 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Partial 45+330 45+440 110 Reconstruction TCS 7 45+440 45+520 80 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up Partial 45+520 46+000 480 Reconstruction TCS 7 46+000 48+000 2000 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up Partial 48+000 53+000 5000 Reconstruction TCS 7 53+000 53+200 200 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up Partial 53+200 56+000 2800 Reconstruction TCS 7 56+000 56+400 400 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up Partial 56+400 59+400 3000 Reconstruction TCS 7 59+400 59+500 100 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up Partial 59+500 62+000 2500 Reconstruction TCS 7 62+000 63+500 1500 Concentric TCS 2 63+500 64+000 500 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up 64+000 64+200 200 Right eccentric TCS 4 64+200 67+200 3000 Concentric TCS 2 67+200 67+430 230 Left Eccentric TCS 3 67+430 67+630 200 Concentric TCS 2 New 67+630 68+300 670 Construction TCS 1 Realignment 68+300 68+500 200 Concentric TCS 2 New 68+500 69+100 600 Construction TCS 1 Realignment 69+100 69+570 470 Concentric TCS 2 New 69+570 70+100 530 Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 70+100 70+200 100 Right eccentric TCS 4 70+200 70+900 700 Concentric TCS 2 70+900 71+400 500 Left Eccentric TCS 3 71+400 71+550 150 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up 71+550 71+750 200 Concentric TCS 2 71+750 72+200 450 Right eccentric TCS 4 72+200 72+400 200 Concentric TCS 2 72+400 72+500 100 Left Eccentric TCS 3 New 72+500 72+650 150 Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 72+650 72+950 300 Concentric TCS 2 72+950 73+300 350 Left Eccentric TCS 3 73+300 73+400 100 Concentric TCS 2 New 73+400 73+550 150 Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 73+550 73+700 150 Left Eccentric TCS 3 New 73+700 75+050 1350 Construction TCS 1 Realignment 75+050 75+200 150 Concentric TCS 2

183 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

New 75+200 75+500 300 Construction TCS 1 Realignment 75+500 75+700 200 Concentric TCS 2 75+700 76+200 500 Left Eccentric TCS 3 76+200 76+600 400 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up 76+600 76+750 150 Right eccentric TCS 4 76+750 77+000 250 Concentric TCS 2 77+000 77+350 350 Left Eccentric TCS 3 77+350 77+900 550 Concentric TCS 2 77+900 78+100 200 Left Eccentric TCS 3 78+100 78+240 140 Concentric TCS 2 New 78+240 78+380 140 Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 78+380 78+650 270 Left Eccentric TCS 3 78+650 78+800 150 Right eccentric TCS 4 78+800 78+900 100 Concentric TCS 2 78+900 79+050 150 Left Eccentric TCS 3 79+050 79+200 150 Concentric TCS 2 79+200 79+400 200 Right eccentric TCS 4 79+400 79+550 150 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up 79+550 82+700 3150 Concentric TCS 2 New 82+700 82+900 200 Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 82+900 84+670 1770 Concentric TCS 2 New 84+670 84+900 230 Construction TCS 1 Realignment 84+900 85+100 200 Right eccentric TCS 4 New 85+100 85+480 380 Construction TCS 1 Realignment 85+480 85+600 120 Right eccentric TCS 4 New 85+600 90+500 4900 Construction TCS 1 Jojawar Bypass Partial 90+500 90+700 200 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 90+700 90+900 200 Construction TCS 1 Realignment Partial 90+900 93+950 3050 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 93+950 94+250 300 Construction TCS 1 Realignment Partial 94+250 94+550 300 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 94+550 94+800 250 Construction TCS 1 Realignment Partial 94+800 95+300 500 Reconstruction TCS 7 95+300 95+500 200 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up Partial 95+500 97+550 2050 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 97+550 97+750 200 Construction TCS 1 Realignment

184 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Partial 97+750 98+200 450 Reconstruction TCS 7 98+200 98+600 400 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up Partial 98+600 99+650 1050 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 99+650 100+100 450 Construction TCS 1 Realignment Partial 100+100 100+700 600 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 100+700 100+950 250 Construction TCS 1 Realignment Partial 100+950 101+560 610 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 101+560 101+800 240 Construction TCS 1 Realignment Partial 101+800 103+260 1460 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 103+260 104+670 1410 Construction TCS 1 Kolar Bypass Partial 104+670 104+900 230 Reconstruction TCS 7 104+900 105+300 400 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up Partial 105+300 106+100 800 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 106+100 106+240 140 Construction TCS 1 Realignment Partial 106+240 107+100 860 Reconstruction TCS 7 Realignment and Ganthi New Bypass (109+300 to 107+100 111+230 4130 Construction TCS 1 111+230) 111+230 111+400 170 Concentric TCS 2 111+400 111+520 120 Left Eccentric TCS 3 111+520 113+100 1580 Concentric TCS 2 113+100 113+900 800 Left Eccentric TCS 3 113+900 114+300 400 Concentric TCS 2 New 114+300 114+450 150 Construction TCS 1 Realignment 114+450 114+900 450 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up 114+900 115+080 180 Concentric TCS 2 New 115+080 116+300 1220 Construction TCS 1 Realignment Partial 116+300 116+800 500 Reconstruction TCS 7 Realignment and lampi New Bypass (117+700 to 116+800 119+900 3100 Construction TCS 1 119+400) Partial 119+900 120+000 100 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 120+000 120+800 800 Construction TCS 1 Realignment Partial 120+800 120+940 140 Reconstruction TCS 7 New 120+940 121+800 860 Construction TCS 1 Realignment

185 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

121+800 122+100 300 Concentric TCS 2 122+100 122+600 500 Left Eccentric TCS 3 Partial 122+600 122+864 264 Reconstruction TCS 7

DESIGN CHAINAGE LENGTH (KM) WIDENING TCS APPLICABLE DESCRIPTON (M) FROM TO 139000 140000 1000 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up 140000 140350 350 Left Eccentric TCS 4 140350 142500 2150 Concentric TCS 2 142500 143800 1300 New Construction TCS 1 Realignment 143800 144100 300 Concentric TCS 2 144100 144325 225 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 144325 146500 2175 Concentric TCS 2 146500 146700 200 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 147700 150700 3000 Concentric TCS 2 150700 152800 2100 New Construction TCS 1 Madra Bypass 152800 153125 325 Concentric TCS 2 153125 155500 2375 New Construction TCS 1 Lunawa Bypass 155500 155750 250 Concentric TCS 2 155750 155850 100 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 155850 156600 750 Concentric TCS 2 156600 156800 200 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up 156800 157900 1100 Concentric TCS 2 157900 161900 4000 New Construction TCS 1 Sewari & Poladra Bypass 161900 164250 2350 Concentric TCS 2 164250 164500 250 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 164500 167100 2600 Concentric TCS 2 167100 170200 3100 New Construction TCS 1 Sewari & Poladra Bypass 170200 175600 5400 Concentric TCS 2 175600 175900 300 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 175900 176500 600 Concentric TCS 6 Built Up 176500 178150 1650 Concentric TCS 2 178150 178700 550 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 178700 181350 2650 Concentric TCS 2 181350 181700 350 Left Eccentric TCS 3 181700 182250 550 Concentric TCS 2 182250 182500 250 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 182500 184300 1800 Concentric TCS 2 184300 184750 450 Right eccentric TCS 4 184750 185500 750 Concentric TCS 2

186 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

185500 185800 300 Left Eccentric TCS 3 185800 187300 1500 Concentric TCS 2 187300 187600 300 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 187600 189000 1400 Concentric TCS 2 189000 189500 500 Left Eccentric TCS 3 189500 190950 1450 Concentric TCS 2 190950 191200 250 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 191200 192500 1300 Concentric TCS 2 192500 193200 700 Right eccentric TCS 4 193200 193450 250 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 193450 194800 1350 Left Eccentric TCS 3 194800 199900 5100 Concentric TCS 2 199900 200400 500 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 200400 200900 500 Concentric TCS 2 200900 201500 600 Concentric TCS 6 201500 201800 300 Right eccentric TCS 4 201800 203950 2150 Concentric TCS 2 203950 204250 300 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 204250 208275 4025 Concentric TCS 2 208275 210200 1925 Concentric TCS 2 Existing PQC Pavement 210200 210500 300 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 210500 210900 400 Concentric TCS 2 Existing PQC Pavement 210900 211300 400 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 211300 211700 400 Concentric TCS 2 Existing PQC Pavement 211700 211900 200 New Construction TCS 1 Curve Improvement 211900 212092 192 Concentric TCS 2 Existing PQC Pavement

7.6 Existing Bridges with Proposal

List of Major Bridges (Proposed) Existing Proposed

Width Width Sr. Existing Design Structural / Span of Structure of No. ChainageChainageStructure Type Hydraulic Proposal Span (m) bridge Type Bridge Condition (m) (m)

4x1.1+ RCC-T 1 48+111 48+375 Pipe/MJB Poor/Submerged 13x1.1+ 8.5 Reconstruction 4x20 12 Girder/MJB 5x1.1

187 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Existing Proposed

Width Width Sr. Existing Design Structural / No. ChainageChainage Span of Structure of Structure Type Hydraulic Proposal Span (m) bridge Type Bridge Condition (m) (m)

RCC 2 64+056 64+265 Pipe/MNB Poor/Submerged 7x1.1 8.5 Reconstruction 4x10 12 Slab/MNB

Retain with 3 72+178 72+346 Pipe/MNB Fair 18x1 8.5 Repairs

RCC T- 4 74+250 74+760 Pipe/MJB Poor/Submerged 13x1 8.5 Reconstruction 5x18 12 Girder/MJB

5 76+512 77+006 RCC slab/MNB Fair 2x3.2 8.5 Retain with Repairs

Retain with 6 76+598 77+093 RCC Slab/MNB Fair 2x3.2 8.5 - - - Repairs

Retain with 7 76+936 77+428 RCC Slab/MNB Fair 2x3.2 8.5 Repairs

8 77+202 77+695 RCC Slab/MNB Poor/Submerged 2x3.2 8.5 Reconstruction 2x3.2 BOX 12

9 77+325 77+818 RCC Slab/MNB Poor/Submerged 2x3.2 8.5 Reconstruction 2x3.2 BOX 12

10 77+802 78+296 RCC Slab/MNB Poor/Submerged 2x3.2 8.5 Reconstruction 2x3.2 BOX 12

11 79+776 80+270 RCC Slab/MNB Fair 4x2.9 7.5 Widening 12

RCC –T 12 113+325 114+270 Pipe/MNB Poor/Submerged 4x1.2 7.5 Reconstruction 4x20 12 Girder/MJB

RCC- 13 139+867 139+900 RCC Slab/MNB Poor 5x6.3 8.5 Reconstruction 5x9 12 Slab/MNB

Abandoned due to 14 153+645 RCC slab/MJB Fair 15x7 8.5 - - - realignment

New 14 a 153+400 In Bypass 15x7 Rcc Slab 12 construction

General 15 156+255 156+000 RCC Slab/MNB Fair 6x7 8.5 Retained - - Repair

9x3.7+ Abandoned RCC Slab 16 167+365 Poor 7.5 due to - - - +Pipe/MNB 5 no. of pipes realignment

188 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Existing Proposed

Width Width Sr. Existing Design Structural / No. ChainageChainage Span of Structure of Structure Type Hydraulic Proposal Span (m) bridge Type Bridge Condition (m) (m)

New PSC- 16a - 167+800 In bypass - - - 3x25 12m construction girder/MJB

RCC- 17 170+375 171+000 RCC Slab/MNB Poor 3x6.5 8.5 Reconstruction 3x7 12m slab/MNB

PSC 18 177+037 177+674 RCC Sla/MJB Poor/Submerged 17x6.5 8.5 Reconstruction 5x26 12m Girder/MJB

19 180+060 180+380 RCC Slab/MJB Fair 13x4.8 8.5 Retained - - -

RCC- 20 182+061 182+694 Pipe/slab/MNB Poor 9x1.2 7.5 Reconstruction 3x6 12m Slab/MNB

Abandoned 21 187+089 RCC Slab/MNB Poor 2x4.3 8.5 due to 2x4.5 Box/MNB 12m realignment

New 21a 187+423 In bypass 2x4.5 Box/MNB 12m construction

22 187+330 187+665 RCC slab/MNB Poor 2x4.3 8.5 Reconstruction 2x4.5 Box/MNB 12m

General 23 209+965 209+970 Pipe/MNB Fair 11x1.2 8.5 Retained Repair/MNB

7.7 List of Total Existing Bridges with Proposal

Existing Proposal

Width of Existing bridge Structure/ Propo Len Sl. Type/ Span (m) Lengt Width of Chainage Hydraulic Proposal sed gth( Type/Cate no Categ Arrangement h (m) Bridge Condition Span m) gory ory (m)

RCC-T Pipe/ 4x1.1+13x1.4 Reconstr 1 48+400 Submerged 8.5 68 4x20 80 Girder/MJ 12m MJB +5x1.1 uction B

Pipe/ Reconstr RCC 2 64+600 Submerged 7x1 8.5 35 4x10 40 12m MNB uction slab/MNB

189 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Pipe/ 3 73+000 Fair 18x1 8.5 45 Retained - - - - MNB

RCC-T Pipe/ Poor/subm Reconstr 4 75+700 13x1.0 8.5 75 5x18 90 Girder/MJ 12m MJB erged uction B RCC 7 78+100 Slab/ Fair 2x3.5 8.5 Retained - 5 MNB

RCC 6 78+200 Slab/ Fair 2x3.1 8.5 6.2 Retained MNB RCC 7 78+500 Slab/ Fair 2x3.1 8.5 6.2 Retained MNB RCC Poor/subm Reconstr 8 78+800 Slab/ 2x3.2 8.5 6.4 2x3.2 6.4 Box/MNB 12m erged uction MNB RCC Poor/Subm Reconstr 9 79+000 Slab/ 2x3.2 8.5 6.4 2x3.2 6.4 Box/MNB 12m erged uction MNB RCC Reconstr 10 79+400 Slab/ Poor 2x3.2 8.5 6.4 2x3.2 6.4 Box/MNB 12m uction MNB RCC Widening/ 11 81+500 Slab/ Fair 4x3.5 7.5 14 Widening - - 12 MNB MNB RCC-T Pipe/ Reconstr 12 115+200 Submerged 4x1.2 7.5 12 4x20 80 girder/MJ 12m MNB uction B RCC Reconstr RCC- 13 140+000 Slab/ Poor 5x6.3 8.5 33.6 5x9 45 12m uction Slab/MNB MNB Rcc Retaine 14 154+500 slab/ Fair 15x7 8.5 105 d - - - - MJB RCC General 15 156+800 Slab/ Fair 6x7 8.5 42 Retained - - - Repair MNB Rcc New RCC-T slab 9x3.7m + 5 Const. on 16 169+500 Poor 7.5 50 3x25 75 girder/MJ 12m +Pipe realignm no. of pipes B /MNB ent RCC Reconstr RCC- 17 171+700 Slab/ Poor 3x6.5 8.5 19.5 3x7 21 12m uction slab/MNB MNB RCC PSC Poor/subm Reconstr 18 177+500 Sla/M 17x6.5 8.5 111 5x26 130 Girder/MJ 12m erged uction JB B RCC 19 181+300 Slab/ Fair 13x4.8 8.5 62.4 Retained - - - - MJB Pipe/s Reconstr RCC- 20 183+600 lab/M Poor 9x1.2 7.5 18 3x6 18 12m uction Slab/MNB NB RCC Reconstr 21 188+400 Slab/ Poor 2x4.3 8.5 8.6 2x4.5 9 Box/MNB 12m uction MNB

190 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

RCC Reconstr 22 188+700 slab/ Poor 2x4.3 8.5 8.6 2x4.5 9 Box/MNB 12m uction MNB General Pipe/ 23 211+100 Fair 11x1.2 8.5 35.2 Retained - - Repair/MN - MNB B

7.8 Existing Causeways with Proposal

There are total of 33 causeways out of which 28 are converted into pipe culverts and 3 are converted into major bridges and 2 into minor bridges. List of existing causeways converted to new proposed bridges

SL Proposed Structure Width of Chainage Structure Type Proposal No Span Type Bridge Remarks

1 New RCC-T Major 86+300 Causeways 5x18 12m Construction Girder Bridge New RCC –T Major 2 89+600 Causeways 5x20 12m construction Girder Bridge New RCC-T Major 3 100+000 Causeways 5x20 12m Construction Girder Bridge New Minor 4 103+000 Causeways 4x10 Rcc-Slab 12m construction Bridge New Minor 5 109+000 Causeways 5x10 Rcc-Slab 12m Construction Bridge

List of existing Causeways converted to Pipe Culverts

Design Existing SL No No of Cell x Span Structure Type Chainage Structure

1 88+000 Causeways 4x1.2 Pipe

2 89+000 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

3 91+600 Causeways 3x1.2 Pipe

4 92+000 Causeways 3x1.2 Pipe

5 93+800 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

6 94+300 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

7 96+000 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

8 96+300 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

9 96+700 Causeways 3x1.2 Pipe

10 97+000 Causeways 3x1.2 Pipe

11 97+300 Causeways 3x1.2 Pipe

191 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Design Existing SL No No of Cell x Span Structure Type Chainage Structure

12 98+600 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

13 99+500 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

14 110+100 Causeways 4x1.2 Pipe

15 110+800 Causeways 3x1.2 Pipe

16 117+000 Causeways 3x1.2 Pipe

17 119+100 Causeways 3x1.2 Pipe

18 119+600 Causeways 3x1.2 Pipe

19 121+400 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

20 121+700 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

21 122+000 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

22 146+600. Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

23 148+200 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

24 148+800 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

25 150+000 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

26 152+200 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

27 158+000 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

28 196+800 Causeways 2x1.2 Pipe

7.9 Culverts Culverts in good condition will be widened to provide for 2 lanes width. Additional culverts will be provided at bypasses, Cross roads and to replace the culverts in poor shape. The proposal for improvement of culverts is as under: Sr. No. Type New Reconstruction Widening Retain Total Construction

1 Box - 16 - - 16

2 Pipe 60 23 6 - 89

3 Slab - - 28 1 29 TOTAL 60 39 34 1 134

192 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

List of existing culverts with proposal

For Existing Structure Proposal

Span Super- Propo Proposed Locatio Sl. Arrangeme structure Width Proposal Struc sed span/Pipe n (km) nt Type ture Width Dia (m)

1 36+000 1.5+1.6+1.5 Slab 12.5 Retained - - -

2 48+200 3x0.9 Pipe 8.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 3x1.2

3 53+200 1x0.9 Pipe 8.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

4 55+800 4x1.2 Pipe 7.5 Widened - 12 -

5 57+700 1x0.9 Pipe 8.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

6 65+000 1x1.2 Pipe 8.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

7 65+900 1x0.6 Pipe 8.0 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

8 66+800 1x1.5 slab 7.5 Widened Slab 12

9 71+300 1x0.9 Pipe 7.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

10 71+600 1x0.6 Pipe 8.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

11 71+900 2x0.6 Pipe 8.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 2x1.2

12 72+800 1x1.2 Pipe 8.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

13 73+500 2x0.9 Pipe 8.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 2x1.2

14 74+000 1x1.2 Slab 7.5 Widened - 12 -

15 76+200 1x3 Slab 7.5 Widened - 12 -

16 76+500 1x3 Slab 7.5 Widened 12

17 76+600 1x3 Slab 7.5 Widened - 12 -

18 77+200 1x1.2 Slab 8.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x2.0

19 77+500 1x4.3 Slab 8.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x4.5

20 77+700 1x3.3 Slab 7.5 Widened - 12 -

21 77+900 2x3 slab 8.5 Reconstruction box 12 2x3

22 80+500 1x6.0 Slab 8.5 Widened - 12 -

23 80+700 1x1.5 Slab 8.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x2.0

24 81+000 1x3 Slab 7.5 Widened - 12 -

25 82+000 1x4 Slab 7.5 Widened - 12 -

193 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

For Existing Structure Proposal

Span Super- Propo Proposed Locatio Sl. Arrangeme structure Width Proposal Struc sed span/Pipe n (km) nt Type ture Width Dia (m)

26 82+100 1x2 slab 7.5 Widened 12

27 82+500 1x4 Slab 7.5 Widened - 12 -

28 82+900 1x3 Slab 7.5 Widened - 12 -

29 83+400 1x3 Slab 7.5 Widened - 12 -

30 98+900 1x1.2 Pipe 7 Widened - 12 -

31 104+200 1x1.5 Slab 7 Reconstruction Box 12 1x2.0

32 105+100 1x1.2 Pipe 7 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

33 105+400 3x1.2 Pipe 7 Reconstruction Pipe 12 3x1.2

34 105+800 1x0.9 Pipe 7 Reconstruction pipe 12 1x1.2

35 106+700 1x1.2 Slab 6.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x2.0

36 119+800 1x0.9 Pipe 6.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

37 121+700 3x1.2 Pipe 7.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 3x1.2

38 140+900 1x0.9 Pipe 7.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

39 145+100 3x1.2 Pipe 7.5 Widened - 12 -

40 146+200 1x1.2 Pipe 7.5 Widened - 12 -

41 157+800 2x1.2 Pipe 7.5 Widened - 12

42 163+000 1x0.6 Pipe 8.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

43 164+400 1x2.5 Slab 7 Widened - 12 -

44 165+600 1x2.5 Slab 7 Widened - 12 -

45 167+100 2x0.9 Pipe 8.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 2x1.2

46 176+500 1x0.9 Pipe 7.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

47 177+200 1x3 Slab 7.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x3.0

48 180+100 1x2.8 Slab 6.5 Widened - 12 -

49 180+300 1x2.8 Slab 6.5 Widened - 12 -

50 180+800 1x2.0 Slab 7 Widened - 12 -

51 181+100 1x3.0 Slab 6.5 Widened - 12 -

52 181+800 1x5.8 Slab 7 Widened - 12 -

53 183+100 1x2.8 Slab 7 Widened - 12 -

194 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

For Existing Structure Proposal

Span Super- Propo Proposed Locatio Sl. Arrangeme structure Width Proposal Struc sed span/Pipe n (km) nt Type ture Width Dia (m)

54 183+300 1x3.2 Slab 7.3 Widened - 12 -

55 183+900 1x4.5 Slab 7.3 Reconstruction Box 12 1x4.5

56 184+200 1x3.5 Slab 7 Widened - 12 -

57 184+500 1x1.7 Slab 7 Widened - 12 -

58 185+200 1x2 Slab 7.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x2.0

59 185+500 NV Pipe/Slab 7.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x2.0

60 185+800 1x4.0 Slab 7.5 Widened - 12 -

61 186+200 1x3.0 Slab 7 Widened - 12 -

62 189+400 1x1.5 Slab 8.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x2.0

63 190+500 1x1.8 Slab 8.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x2.0

64 191+500 4x0.6 Pipe 7.5 Reconstruction Pipe 12 4x1.2

65 194+000 1x1.1 Slab 7 Reconstruction Box 12 1x2.0

66 197+700 1x1.2 Pipe 7 Widened - 12 -

67 199+100 1x1.2 Pipe 8 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

68 202+200 NV Pipe/Slab 8 Reconstruction Pipe 12 3x1.2

69 203+300 1X5.8 Slab 7 Widened - 12 -

70 206+900 NV Pipe/Slab 7 Reconstruction Pipe 12 1x1.2

71 207+000 1x3 Slab 8.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x3.0

72 207+400 1X4.0 Slab 8.5 Widened - 12 -

73 208+400 1x4 Slab 8.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x4.0

74 208+900 1x2.5 Slab 8.5 Reconstruction Box 12 1x2.5

7.10 Drainage and Protection Works Lined drains are proposed to be constructed in urban areas. Stone Masonry retaining and breast walls will be provided in hilly terrain. Provision has been made in the estimate on the basis of preliminary proposals.

7.11 Junctions 23 major and 127 minor junctions provision has been made at this stage. Details will be worked out at the time of preparation of Preliminary Project Report.

195 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

7.12 Toll Plaza Provision has been made for 2 Nos. toll plaza including vehicle rescue & medical aid post

7.13 Traffic Safety Features, Road Furniture and Road Markings Provision has been made for traffic safety features, road furniture and road markings on per km basis, based on the experience on similar other roads.

7.14 Miscellaneous Provision has been made for the following items under this sub head: x Passenger Shelter - 48 Nos.

7.15 Hydraulic calculations Detailed hydraulic calculations for proposed bridges are enclosed in Annexure 2 in report.

196 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

CHAPTER 8

COST ESTIMATE AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

8.1 General The cost estimates for the project are extremely important as its entire viability and implementation depends on the project cost. Therefore, cost estimates have been carried out with due care. The project cost estimates have been prepared considering various items of works and based on the detailed rate analysis prepared by the consultant.

The rates for the items of work have been assessed from current market rates and also the consultants experience on similar works in the vicinity of the project road.

8.2 Estimation of Quantities The quantities of major items of work for the Project road have been estimated on the basis of pavement designs, geometric design and structural designs of the project road.

The estimation of quantities has been done for the following major items of work:

¾ Site Clearance ¾ Earth Works ¾ Granular Sub-base and Base Courses ¾ Bituminous Courses ¾ Bridges Culverts, Underpasses, Interchanges, Flyovers and Retaining Walls etc. ¾ Kerbs, Drainage and Protective Works ¾ Toll Plaza ¾ Road Furniture and Safety Works ¾ Traffic Management and Miscellaneous. ¾ Land Acquisition ¾ Relocation of Utilities ¾ Rehabilitation and Social Costs ¾ Environmental Works

8.3 Site Clearance Site clearance quantity is estimated, as overall area requires clearance for construction of road. It includes the dismantling of pavement courses, drains if any, kilometer and hectometer stones, road signs, crash barriers, necessary excavation, back filling, grubbing & disposal of cleared material etc. and reuse/re-fixing of usable material.

8.4 Earth Works Earthwork quantities are calculated and cross verified using the “MX Roads” software package. The earthwork is calculated based on the amount of cut or fill with respect to the

197 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

datum line defined in the template and the existing ground profile, which in turn is obtained from the DTM surface developed by the software.

8.5 Pavement Material (Flexible) The pavement work includes construction of proposed two-lane road. The flexible pavement includes Bituminous Concrete (BC), Dense Bituminous Macadam (DBM), Wet Mix Macadam (WMM), Granular Sub-base (GSB), and other related items like prime coat and tack coat etc. over road formation. The quantities of bituminous course are calculated for widening portion as a new construction and the same is calculated as an overlay over the existing pavement.

8.6 Cross Drainage Structures, Underpasses & Flyovers The construction of new bridges, ROB and culverts are assessed on proposed length and the earthwork, pavement and shoulders for bridge approaches have been included as appropriate roadwork items. The other items like RCC and PCC work of bridges, culverts and ROB are calculated as per GAD’s and development proposals.

8.7 Road Junctions, Interchanges, Bus Stops & Truck Lay-Byes The quantities for Road junctions, Interchanges and for safety measures like truck lay- byes and Bus bays etc. have been calculated based on the standard drawings presented in two-lane manual.

8.8 Road Furniture & Safety Works Provisions for road safety measures like road signs, markings, and road appurtenant have been made. Turfing on embankment, earthen shoulder and hedges in median and roadside plantation and landscaping have been considered on the basis of traffic and other requirements.

8.9 Toll Plazas Two Toll Plazas with a semi-automatic toll collection system comprising 2+1 lanes of width 3.2m and 4.5 m respectively on either side of C/L will be provided. Numerous lanes are provided so as to curtail delays within permissible limits. The total system cost (excluding cost of civil works) and Administration building and other appropriate arrangement and access areas of toll plaza costs have been excluded from the present scope since the same is being constructed by PWD under separate contract.

8.10 IDC & Financing Charges Contingencies Charges @ 25% on Civil Works shall be added over the civil cost to arrive at the total project cost (TPC)

8.11 Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation Costs The land in the project corridor mostly belongs to the Govt. of Rajasthan since the development proposal for the project road is aimed with minimum or no land acquisition.

198 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

As such the land needs to be transferred from Government for the construction of project road without any cost liability.

Toll Plaza, Lay-Byes and Interchange etc. will require some additional land to accommodate the proposed 2-lane configuration facility. Based on alignment design, land and structure acquisition cost including Rehabilitation and Resettlement costs are assessed.

8.12 Relocation of Utilities Relocation of Utilities like Electric lines, Telephone lines, OFC etc within the proposed ROW have been considered for costing purpose. The concerned Administrative Departments shall be requested to give the detailed cost estimates dully approved / sanctioned by the competent authority. A lumpsum provision @ 1% of the total project cost is considered in the cost estimate.

8.13 Environmental Improvement Works The cost of environmental improvements works including the cost of tree cutting, replanting, monitoring during construction i.e. all the civil and non civil works have been included in the project cost estimate. A lumpsum provision @ 5% of the total project cost is considered in the cost estimate.

8.14 Project Cost

x Rates of various items have been adopted from the prevailing market rates and based on consultants experience on similar works in vicinity of the project road.

x Based on the detailed engineering study, the following parameters are considered to arrive at the preliminary cost estimate for the purpose of preliminary financial analysis:

x The total design length of the project road is 161.00 km and is proposed for 2 laning.

x There are existing 5 nos. of major bridges and 18 nos. of minor bridges along the project road. Out of these 23 bridges, 8 nos. are retained, 13 nos. are proposed for reconstruction while 1 no. is proposed for widening, and 1 no. is proposed on realignment and 5 nos. are newly proposed on causeway locations..

x There are existing 86 culverts including 25 slab culverts and 40 pipe culverts and 21 Box culverts along the project road.

199 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

x Out of 25 existing slab culverts, 24 slab culverts are proposed for widening & 1 being retained

x Out of 40 existing pipe culverts, 6 nos. proposed for widening, 33 proposed for reconstruction,1 is retained and additional 62 nos. proposed for new construction.

x Out of 21 existing box culverts, 21 proposed for reconstruction,

x There are 23 nos. of major junctions and approximately 127 nos. of minor junctions proposed along the project road.

x Slope protection work is provided where ht. of embankment is more than 3m and at locations where project road passes through bund/reservoir area, if any.

x The costing for traffic signs, pavement marking and safety appurtenances is calculated on prorate basis.

Based on above guidelines, the total project cost is worked out for 2 Laning configurations as per typical cross sections and schedule. Detailed backup calculations along with rate analysis is enclosed in Annexure-3.

8.15 Operation Maintenance Cost

Subsequent to the working done for project costs which includes both civil as well as total project costs as described above, operational maintenance costs are also worked for the project road. The same is utilized in the financial analysis presented in the subsequent paragraphs for working out the total financial viability of project. Operational maintenance costs have been taken as per the details given below:

VGF MODE

Routine Maintenance Costs – Rs. 1.75 lakh / km /year

Periodic Maintenance Costs – Rs. 30 lakh / km /6th year

Electricity & Patrolling Expenses - Rs. 0.30 lakh / km / year

Toll Plaza & O/M Expenses – Rs. 0.75 Cr. / TP / year

ANNUITY MODE

Routine Maintenance Costs – Rs. 1.75 lakh / km /year

200 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Periodic Maintenance Costs – Rs. 14 lakh / km /4th & 7th year

Electricity & Patrolling Expenses - Rs. 0.30 lakh / km / year

Toll Plaza & O/M Expenses – Rs. 0.5 Cr. / TP / year

Abstract of the cost for the project road is given below:

201 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

CONSULTANCY SERVICE FOR THE PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR PACKAGE 8, TWO LANING FROM KM. 35 TO KM. 212 OF SH-62 COMPRISING THE SECTION FROM SOJAT TO PINDWARA (HIGHWAY-II) IN THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN GENERAL ABSTRACT (BOT Mode)

Stretches (Km) 120.30 Km 40.75 Km 161.05 Km % Realignments Part "A" - Road Works Main Section (Rs. Lacs) Total (Rs. Lacs) (Rs. Lacs) Earthwork & Site Clearance Site Clearance & Dismantling 124.76 21.37 146.13 0.50% Earthwork 2,144.19 2,157.02 4,301.21 14.70% Sub base and Base Course Granular Sub Base 1,902.17 918.67 2,820.84 9.64% Base Course 1,441.99 660.16 2,102.15 7.18% Bituminous Work 7,064.17 2,384.02 9,448.19 32.29% Total Road Works 12,677.28 6,141.23 18,818.52

Major Structure (Major & Minor Bridges) 2,970.58 572.68 3,543.26 12.11%

Culvert and Protection Work 648.07 170.44 818.51 2.80% Miscellaneous (A) Rigid Pavement 0.00 0.00 0.00% Junction Improvement 709.05 709.05 2.42%

202 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Road Signage & Marking 174.31 0.00 174.31 0.60% Drain 1,297.27 1,297.27 4.43% Precast Concrete Interlocking Blocks 296.43 296.43 1.01% Total Civil Construction Cost (Based on 2013 18,773.00 6,884.35 25,657.35 BSR NH Circle, Jodhpur) Escallation @ 5% per annum for two year 1,924.23 705.65 2,629.88 8.99% (10.25%) Civil Construction Cost after Escallation 20,697.23 7,590.00 28,287.23 Miscellaneous (B) Non BSR Item as on 2015 Toll Plaza (2-Lane : 2 No's) 240.00 240.00 0.82% Bus Shelters (2 x 19 No's) 48.00 48.00 0.16% Arboriculture 263.79 263.79 0.90% Maintenance During Construction 410.79 11.96 422.75 1.44% Civil Construction Cost as on 2015 21,659.81 7,601.96 29,261.77 IDC & other Financial Charges @ 25% of Civil 5,414.95 1,900.49 7,315.44 Construction Cost Total Project Cost 27,074.76 9,502.45 36,577.21

203 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

CONSULTANCY SERVICE FOR THE PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR PACKAGE 8, TWO LANING FROM KM. 35 TO KM. 212 OF SH-62 COMPRISING THE SECTION FROM SOJAT TO PINDWARA (HIGHWAY-II) IN THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN Cost Estimate (BOT Mode) 161.04 Length = Km. 6 Sr. Quantit Items Unit Rate (Rs.) Amount (Rs.) No. y 1 Road works

i) TCS : 1_HS:I (Realignment in Plain/ Rolling Terrain) (from km 7.300 16,116,042.00 km 34+910 to km 88+000) 117,647,107.00

ii) TCS : 1_HS:II (Realignment in Plain/ Rolling Terrain) km 16.200 14,842,342.00 (from km 88+000 to km 122+864) 240,445,940.00

iii) TCS : 1_HS:III (Realignment in Plain/ Rolling Terrain) km 17.250 14,842,342.00 (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) 256,030,400.00

iv) TCS : 2_HS:I (Concentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling km 13.330 9,912,236.00 Terrain) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) 132,130,106.00

v) TCS : 2_HS:II (Concentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling km 2.630 9,239,068.00 Terrain) (from km 88+000 to km 122+864) 24,298,749.00

vi) TCS : 2_HS:III (Concentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling km 13.217 9,239,068.00 Terrain) (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) 122,112,762.00

vii) TCS : 2A_HS:I (Concentric Widening With Overlay in km 3.660 11,792,484.00 Plain/ Rolling Terrain) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) 43,160,491.00

204 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

viii) TCS : 2A_HS:III (Concentric Widening With Overlay in km 5.000 10,534,532.00 Plain/ Rolling Terrain) (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) 52,672,660.00

TCS : 2B_HS:III (Concentric Widening With Partial ix) Reconstruction With WMM in Plain/ Rolling Terrain) km 9.450 11,562,983.00 (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) 109,270,189.00 TCS : 2C_HS:III (Concentric Widening With Partial x) Reconstruction With GSB in Plain/ Rolling Terrain) (from km 21.475 11,888,032.00 km 139+000 to km 212+092) 255,295,487.00

xi) TCS : 3/4_HS:I (Eccencentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling km 4.150 7,092,217.00 Terrain) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) 29,432,701.00

xii) TCS : 3/4_HS:II (Eccencentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling km 1.420 6,769,037.00 Terrain) (from km 88+000 to km 122+864) 9,612,033.00

xiii) TCS : 3/4_HS:III (Eccencentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling km 0.350 6,769,037.00 Terrain) (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) 2,369,163.00

TCS : 3/4C_HS:I (Eccencentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling xiv) Terrain Partial Reconstruction With WMM) (from km km 0.220 11,972,351.00 34+910 to km 88+000) 2,633,917.00

TCS : 3/4C_HS:III (Eccencentric Widening in Plain/ xv) Rolling Terrain Partial Reconstruction With WMM) (from km 3.950 10,730,225.00 km 139+000 to km 212+092) 42,384,389.00

xvi) TCS : 6_HS:I (Widening in Built up Area) (from km km 1.200 16,714,131.00 34+910 to km 88+000) 20,056,957.00

xvii) TCS : 6_HS:II (Widening in Built up Area) (from km km 0.450 16,410,856.00 88+000 to km 122+864) 7,384,885.00

205 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

xviii) TCS : 6_HS:III (Widening in Built up Area) (from km km 1.000 16,410,856.00 139+000 to km 212+092) 16,410,856.00

xix) TCS : 6A_HS:I (Widening in Built up Area With Overlay) km 7.730 19,668,805.00 (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) 152,039,863.00

xx) TCS : 6A_HS:III (Widening in Built up Area With Overlay) km 0.600 18,446,584.00 (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) 11,067,950.00

xxi) TCS : 6B_HS:I (Widening in Built up Area With Partial km 0.910 21,284,943.00 Reconstruction WMM) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) 19,369,298.00

xxii) TCS : 6C_HS:I (Widening in Built up Area With Partial km 0.700 21,708,435.00 Reconstruction GSB) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) 15,195,905.00

xxiii) TCS : 6C_HS:II (Widening in Built up Area With Partial km 1.000 20,491,786.00 Reconstruction GSB) (from km 88+000 to km 122+864) 20,491,786.00

xxiv) TCS : 6C_HS:III (Widening in Built up Area With Partial km 0.800 20,491,786.00 Reconstruction GSB) (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) 16,393,429.00

xxv) TCS : 7_HS:I (Rehabilitation from WMM) (from km km 0.590 12,256,921.00 34+910 to km 88+000) 7,231,583.00

xxvi) TCS : 7_HS:II (Rehabilitation from WMM) (from km km 1.004 10,998,969.00 88+000 to km 122+864) 11,042,965.00

TCS : 7C_HS:I (Rehabilitation from WMM With Partial km 13.300 12,581,969.00 xxvii) Reconstruction GSB) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) 167,340,188.00

206 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

xxviii TCS : 7C_HS:II (Rehabilitation from WMM With Partial km 12.160 11,324,018.00 Reconstruction GSB) (from km 88+000 to km 122+864) 137,700,059.00 ) 2 Bridges and Structures As per details 354,326,326.40 3 Culverts As per details 81,850,827.20 Reinforced Earth Structure inc. Friction Slab and Conc. Crah 4 m Barrier 5 Road furniture and appurtenances As per details 17,430,859.56 6 Junction Improvement i) Major Junctions Nr 23 1,244,977.00 28,634,471.00 ii) Minor Junction Nr 127 332,842.00 42,270,934.00 SUB TOTAL (A) 2,565,735,236.16 Increase in Civil Cost Due to BSR Rates 2013 (10.25% of A) 262,987,862.00 Toll Plaza (2 Lane) Nr 2 12,000,000.00 24,000,000.00 Bus Shelter Nr 48 100,000.00 4,800,000.00

Repair and Maintenance of existing road during construction period km 161.046 262,500.00 42,274,575.00

Tree cutting and Plantation km 161.046 163,800.00 26,379,335.00 SUB TOTAL (B) 2,926,177,008.16 Cost per Km. Rs. 1.82 Crore

207 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

IDC, Financing Cost (25% of B) 731,544,252.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST 3,657,721,260.16 Say 365.7 Cr.

CONSULTANCY SERVICE FOR THE PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR PACKAGE 8, TWO LANING FROM KM. 35 TO KM. 212 OF SH-62 COMPRISING THE SECTION FROM SOJAT TO PINDWARA (HIGHWAY-II) IN THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN GENERAL ABSTRACT (Annuity Mode) Stretches (Km) 120.30 Km 40.75 Km 161.05 Km % Realignments Part "A" - Road Works Main Section (Rs. Lacs) Total (Rs. Lacs) (Rs. Lacs) Earthwork & Site Clearance Site Clearance & Dismantling 124.76 21.37 146.13 0.50% Earthwork 2,144.19 2,157.02 4,301.21 14.70% Sub base and Base Course Granular Sub Base 1,902.17 918.67 2,820.84 9.64% Base Course 1,441.99 660.16 2,102.15 7.18% Bituminous Work 7,064.17 2,384.02 9,448.19 32.29% Total Road Works 12,677.28 6,141.23 18,818.52 Major Structure (Major & Minor Bridges) 2,970.58 572.68 3,543.26 12.11% Culvert and Protection Work 648.07 170.44 818.51 2.80%

208 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

Miscellaneous (A) Rigid Pavement 0.00 0.00 0.00% Junction Improvement 709.05 709.05 2.42% Road Signage & Marking 174.31 174.31 0.60% Drain 1,297.27 1,297.27 4.43% Precast Concrete Interlocking Blocks 296.43 296.43 1.01% Total Civil Construction Cost (Based on 2013 18,773.00 6,884.35 25,657.35 BSR NH Circle, Jodhpur) Escallation @ 5% per annum for two year 1,924.23 705.65 2,629.88 8.99% (10.25%) Civil Construction Cost after Escallation 20,697.23 7,590.00 28,287.23 Miscellaneous (B) Non BSR Item as on 2015 Toll Plaza (2-Lane : 2 No's) 240.00 240.00 0.82% Bus Shelters (2 x 19 No's) 48.00 48.00 0.16% Arboriculture 263.79 263.79 0.90% Maintenance During Construction 410.79 11.96 422.75 1.44% Civil Construction Cost as on 2015 21,659.81 7,601.96 29,261.77 IDC & other Financial Charges @ 15% of Civil 3,248.97 1,140.29 4,389.27 Construction Cost Total Project Cost 24,908.78 8,742.25 33,651.04

209 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

CONSULTANCY SERVICE FOR THE PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR PACKAGE 8, TWO LANING FROM KM. 35 TO KM. 212 OF SH-62 COMPRISING THE SECTION FROM SOJAT TO PINDWARA (HIGHWAY-II) IN THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Cost Estimate (Annuity Mode)

Length = 161.046 Km. Sr. Items Unit Quantity Rate (Rs.) Amount (Rs.) No.

1 Road works

TCS : 1_HS:I (Realignment in Plain/ Rolling Terrain) i) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) km 7.300 16,116,042.00 117,647,107.00 TCS : 1_HS:II (Realignment in Plain/ Rolling Terrain) ii) (from km 88+000 to km 122+864) km 16.200 14,842,342.00 240,445,940.00 TCS : 1_HS:III (Realignment in Plain/ Rolling Terrain) iii) (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) km 17.250 14,842,342.00 256,030,400.00 TCS : 2_HS:I (Concentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling iv) Terrain) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) km 13.330 9,912,236.00 132,130,106.00 TCS : 2_HS:II (Concentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling v) Terrain) (from km 88+000 to km 122+864) km 2.630 9,239,068.00 24,298,749.00 TCS : 2_HS:III (Concentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling vi) Terrain) (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) km 13.217 9,239,068.00 122,112,762.00 TCS : 2A_HS:I (Concentric Widening With Overlay in vii) Plain/ Rolling Terrain) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) km 3.660 11,792,484.00 43,160,491.00 TCS : 2A_HS:III (Concentric Widening With Overlay in viii) Plain/ Rolling Terrain) (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) km 5.000 10,534,532.00 52,672,660.00 TCS : 2B_HS:III (Concentric Widening With Partial ix) Reconstruction With WMM in Plain/ Rolling Terrain) km 9.450 11,562,983.00 109,270,189.00 (from km 139+000 to km 212+092)

210 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

TCS : 2C_HS:III (Concentric Widening With Partial x) Reconstruction With GSB in Plain/ Rolling Terrain) (from km 21.475 11,888,032.00 255,295,487.00 km 139+000 to km 212+092) TCS : 3/4_HS:I (Eccencentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling xi) Terrain) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) km 4.150 7,092,217.00 29,432,701.00 TCS : 3/4_HS:II (Eccencentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling xii) Terrain) (from km 88+000 to km 122+864) km 1.420 6,769,037.00 9,612,033.00 TCS : 3/4_HS:III (Eccencentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling xiii) Terrain) (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) km 0.350 6,769,037.00 2,369,163.00 TCS : 3/4C_HS:I (Eccencentric Widening in Plain/ Rolling xiv) Terrain Partial Reconstruction With WMM) (from km km 0.220 11,972,351.00 2,633,917.00 34+910 to km 88+000) TCS : 3/4C_HS:III (Eccencentric Widening in Plain/ xv) Rolling Terrain Partial Reconstruction With WMM) (from km 3.950 10,730,225.00 42,384,389.00 km 139+000 to km 212+092) TCS : 6_HS:I (Widening in Built up Area) (from km xvi) 34+910 to km 88+000) km 1.200 16,714,131.00 20,056,957.00 TCS : 6_HS:II (Widening in Built up Area) (from km xvii) 88+000 to km 122+864) km 0.450 16,410,856.00 7,384,885.00 TCS : 6_HS:III (Widening in Built up Area) (from km xviii) 139+000 to km 212+092) km 1.000 16,410,856.00 16,410,856.00 TCS : 6A_HS:I (Widening in Built up Area With Overlay) xix) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) km 7.730 19,668,805.00 152,039,863.00 TCS : 6A_HS:III (Widening in Built up Area With xx) Overlay) (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) km 0.600 18,446,584.00 11,067,950.00 TCS : 6B_HS:I (Widening in Built up Area With Partial xxi) Reconstruction WMM) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) km 0.910 21,284,943.00 19,369,298.00 TCS : 6C_HS:I (Widening in Built up Area With Partial xxii) Reconstruction GSB) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) km 0.700 21,708,435.00 15,195,905.00 TCS : 6C_HS:II (Widening in Built up Area With Partial xxiii) Reconstruction GSB) (from km 88+000 to km 122+864) km 1.000 20,491,786.00 20,491,786.00

211 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

TCS : 6C_HS:III (Widening in Built up Area With Partial xxiv) Reconstruction GSB) (from km 139+000 to km 212+092) km 0.800 20,491,786.00 16,393,429.00 TCS : 7_HS:I (Rehabilitation from WMM) (from km xxv) 34+910 to km 88+000) km 0.590 12,256,921.00 7,231,583.00 TCS : 7_HS:II (Rehabilitation from WMM) (from km xxvi) 88+000 to km 122+864) km 1.004 10,998,969.00 11,042,965.00 TCS : 7C_HS:I (Rehabilitation from WMM With Partial xxvii) Reconstruction GSB) (from km 34+910 to km 88+000) km 13.300 12,581,969.00 167,340,188.00 TCS : 7C_HS:II (Rehabilitation from WMM With Partial xxviii) Reconstruction GSB) (from km 88+000 to km 122+864) km 12.160 11,324,018.00 137,700,059.00 As per 2 Bridges and Structures details 354,326,326.40 As per 3 Culverts details 81,850,827.20 Reinforced Earth Structure inc. Friction Slab and Conc. Crah 4 m Barrier As per 5 Road furniture and appurtenances details 17,430,859.56 6 Junction Improvement i) Major Junctions Nr 23 1,244,977.00 28,634,471.00 ii) Minor Junction Nr 127 332,842.00 42,270,934.00 SUB TOTAL (A) 2,565,735,236.16 Increase in Civil Cost Due to BSR Rates 2013 262,987,862.00 (10.25% of A) 7 Toll Plaza (2 Lane) Nr 2 12,000,000.00 24,000,000.00 8 Bus Shelter Nr 48 100,000.00 4,800,000.00 Repair and Maintenance of existing road during construction 9 km 161.046 262,500.00 42,274,575.00 period 10 Tree cutting and Plantation km 161.05 163,800.00 26,379,335.00

212 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

SUB TOTAL (B) 2,926,177,008.16 Cost per Km. Rs. 1.82 Crore IDC, Financing Cost (15% of B) 438,926,551.00

TOTAL PROJECT COST 3,365,103,559.16

Say 336.5 Cr.

213 Draft Feasibility Report Feasibility Report for Rajasthan PWD Package-8 i.e.from Km 35+000 to Km

212+000 of SH-62, Sojat to Pindwara (Highway-II) in the State of Rajasthan

From the above analysis it is inferred that the Project Road is found to be non- viable under BOT / Toll Basis for Development for 2 Laning with Granular Shoulder for both the options as per the details given in Table 7.2.

Seeing the above scenario the viability of project road is worked out on BOT / Annuity Basis as per the attached sheet

214 Draft Feasibility Report